HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: pls@cup.portal.com (Paul L Schauble)
Newsgroups: alt.magick
Subject: Re: Singin' Those Apocalypse Blues
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 92 21:34:13 PST
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
  <1992Dec11.182521.19366@u.washington.edu>
  <JOSHUA.92Dec11143746@bailey.cpac.washington.edu>
  <1992Dec12.002631.8867@u.washington.edu>

John Greer writes...

> Remember "Power too cheap to meter"?

No, I don't. I've never seen that from anyone other than someone on an anti-
nuclear crusade. Can you tell me by whom and when and where it was said?

    ++PLS
From: jcf@world.std.com (Joseph C Fineman)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Excrement in the English Language
Date: 21 Dec 92 02:38:02 GMT
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA

evan@hpl.hp.com (Evan Kirshenbaum) writes:

>"Horse shit" and "Bull shit" are nouns and adjectives meaning "extreme
>falsehood".

In my dialect, anyway, they aren't the same.  "Horseshit", to me, is
more general & applies to any sort of mischief or misbehavior.
"Bullshit" applies only to statements & connotes disbelief.

-- 
        Joe Fineman             jcf@world.std.com
        239 Clinton Road        (617) 731-9190
        Brookline, MA 02146
From: jim@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Jim  Scobbie)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Who vs. Whom (FAQ?)ex
Date: 15 Dec 92 09:12:55 GMT
Organization: Centre for Cognitive Science, Edinburgh, UK

djohns@elm.circa.ufl.edu (David A. Johns) writes:

>"Give one to who*ever comes through the door"
>"Give one to him"
>        but "Give one to whomever comes through the door" is wrong.

>David Johns


Which Engish-speaking communities use "whomever", "whomsoever" (in real
life)? Or is it just a thin slice at a certain literary level across
each of them?
From: cam@castle.ed.ac.uk (Chris Malcolm)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: "a" and sthenic
Date: 17 Dec 92 17:06:21 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University

In article <BzAyrC.58v@cs.umu.se> dvldbg@cs.umu.se (Daniel Brahneborg) writes:

>In a book I have about Natural Language Processing they mention the
>word "sthenic", and say that "no self-respecting native speaker of
>English would dream of using it".

The clue is "speaker", since in speech saying "you're a sthenic" is
easily confused with the more common "you're asthenic", which not only
means the opposite, but also carries a historical presumption of
masturbation. So, if you go into your local biker bar and seek to
curry favour with some large hairy brute by referring to him as "a
sthenic" you are likely to be misunderstood.
-- 
Chris Malcolm    cam@uk.ac.ed.aifh          +44 (0)31 650 3085
Department of Artificial Intelligence,    Edinburgh University
5 Forrest Hill, Edinburgh, EH1 2QL, UK                DoD #205
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: watson@pioneer.arc.nasa.gov (John S. Watson - FSC)
Subject: plural of AIRCRAFT?
Organization: NASA Ames Res. Ctr. Mtn Vw CA 94035
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 18:37:29 GMT


Sorry if this has been asked before ...
 
We got into a debate over this at lunch yesterday:
What is the plural of the word "aircraft"? 
Is it "aircraft" or "aircrafts" or both?
 
While I'm at it ... is there any good reference books
for these sort of questions?  

Thanks,
John


John S. Watson               watson@ames.arc.nasa.gov
#include <stddsclm.h> 

Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: slb22@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Seth "the Lesser")
Subject: Re: Knives and forks
Organization: Generic American College Kids (G.A.C.K.)
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 03:12:00 GMT
Reply-To: slb22@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Seth "the Lesser")
X-Posted-From: cunixb.cc.columbia.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

cam@aifh.ed.ac.uk (Chris Malcolm) writes:
>
>The general principle is that dexterous and efficient use of eating
>tools is grown up and appropriate; inappropriate are childish
>simplifications due to lack of dexterity. For example, it is better to
>eat spaghetti with a fork only, if you can manage it neatly and
>efficiently; but it is better to use a fork and spoon neatly than to
>make a mess of trying to use a fork only.

<polite incredulity> Let me get this straight.  You're telling me that the use
of a pasta spoon to limit the depth of forking when eating spaghetti, though
considered highly appropriate in Italy, is frowned upon by the British?

Seth L. Blumberg          \ Warning: This posting has been determined to cause
slb22@columbia.edu (play)   \ cancer in laboratory animals.  Please make sure
sethb@ctr.columbia.edu (work) \ that no white mice are allowed to read it.  
    > No one I know shares my opinions, least of all Columbia University. <
From: kieron@root.co.uk (Kieron Drake)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: chaps and sexist language
Summary: chaps may not be sexist after all
Date: 18 Dec 92 17:53:20 GMT
Organization: UniSoft Ltd., London, England

Sue Millar wrote:
>Mandar, you've really messed up the attributions here.  I am
>the "chap" to which you refer above.  Thanks for removing all doubt
>that "male" is the default gender on the net & just about everywhere
>else.
>

For what it's worth the word "chaps" can be used as as a jocular
equivalent of "everyone"/"all those present" as in "Hey, chaps,
anyone for a curry?". In this case "chaps" is gender neutral.
This usage may be limited to parts of the S.E. of England though;
anyway, that's the only area I've heard it so used.

	kieron

-- 
kieron@root.co.uk	Tel: +44 71 729 3773 (or 071 729 3773 in the UK)
Kieron Drake		Fax: +44 71 729 3273 (or 071 729 3273 in the UK)
Senior Consultant, UniSoft Ltd., Spa house, Chapel Place, Rivington Street,
London EC2A 3DQ, UK
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: sp@osf.org (Simon Patience)
Subject: Re: Something NEW, ferGawdzake!
Organization: Open Software Foundation
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 07:08:57 GMT

In article <7940@tekig7.PEN.TEK.COM>, briand@tekig5.pen.tek.com (Brian D Diehm) writes:
> >I am not selling this idea, but I subscribe to it.  I haven't
> >witnessed the birth of the distinction, but I am told by someone who
> >has done (and whom I know as highly sensitive to language matters)
>  ^^^^^^^^
> >that usefulness has been an issue, and I find this quite plausible.
> 
> As an American, I've found this use of the verb "to do" is extremely jarring
> to my ear, though apparently it is common in the UK, if not the commonwealth.
> Can't forget the South Africans or New Zealanders on the net! Canadians (hi
> Rheal!) probably side with their southron neighbors on this issue, but I don't
> know for sure, eh?
> 
> Americans would say "I might have" or "I might have done so," but they would
> never think to say "I might have done." It would definitely sound like an
> affectation, and would probably produce snickers among those who were aware of
> the British usage. To those who had never heard it, it would simply sound
> wrong or incomplete. "You might have done WHAT? Why'dja stop? Are you OK?
> Not choking, are you?" Well, I exaggerate, but this *is* the net. . .

I have heard of similar problems with an exchange that goes roughly as
following;

 A. (For American, for it was he) Could you do this for me?
 B. (For Briton, as he was) Yes, I could do.
 A. Could do what?

To my British ears, the response B gave was perfectly OK but it was
clearly not to the American. I would also be quite be quite happy with
a simple "Yes, I could" but it would probably mean something different.
The "Yes, I could do" means more like "yes I will, if you have a good 
enough reason because I am rather busy at the moment and the cat kept me
up all night last night, etc etc" whereas "Yes, I could" means more like
"Of course I am capable but there is no way that you are going to get me
to do it without holding a gun to my head, fart face". I may have gone 
overboard with my explanations.

Simon.

-- 
  Simon Patience
  Open Software Foundation			Phone: +33-76-63-48-72
  Research Institute				FAX:   +33-76-51-05-32
  2 Avenue De Vignate				Email: sp@gr.osf.org
  38610 Gieres, France				       uunet!gr.osf.org!sp
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: baron@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Dennis Baron)
Subject: About FAQs
Organization: University of Illinois
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 15:56:58 GMT

A couple of people have mentioned developing FAQs for a.u.e. 
recently.  Being a little slow on the uptake, it didn't occur
to me until just now that all usage critiques constitute a set
of FAQs.  Which is to say that since the publication of Robert
Baker's *Reflections on the English Language* (1770) there has
been a fairly consistent outpouring of usage guides dealing with
a core set of issues.  

John Algeo noted in 1977 that usage critics have traditionally taken their 
material from this core set, occasionally adding or dropping an item (even 
they reluctantly must accept change), but pretty much keeping the canon 
intact.  Furthermore, he demonstrates that usage critics take as their data 
the work of other usage critics, and not the facts of language itself.  

As a result, there has developed a set of FAQs that is parallel to but more 
or less distinct from actual usage, a genre of language criticism that is 
self-feeding and endlessly repetitive.  The FAQs have changed little over
the past 222 years, as a casual dip into Baker will reveal.  

So the fact that the same questions keep cropping up on a.u.e. should
come as no surprise.  It should also raise some questions, like 

--why do we feel compelled to fight language all the time?
--why do we prefer knee-jerk responses (tongue-flap?) to questions
like generic masculines, rather than looking at language in all its
contextual complexities?  
--how frequently do usage-book answers fail us when we are really churning 
out prose? 
--why, when we are reading, does the author's status condition us to search
for language errors when we have determined the author is not an authority
(eg, is a student, a member of the lay publiic, a dabbler) but if we assess
the writer to be a pro, an expert, or someone with whom we are disposed to
agree, we never even notice so-called deviations from the norms we apply to
suspect writers?
--usage guides may be useful for copyeditors, who need quick formulas for
consistency in prose, and they are certainly fun to argue over, but I don't
think many people use them very much, when they are writing or reading, 
except when they are predisposed to carp or fear the response of some
more authoritative reader.

These are the questions I ask frequently, and would like to see more
answers to.  Any takers?

--
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: sp@osf.org (Simon Patience)
Subject: Re: chaps and sexist language
Organization: Open Software Foundation
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 07:08:22 GMT

In article <BzGv0x.5CK@root.co.uk>, kieron@root.co.uk (Kieron Drake) writes:
> Sue Millar wrote:
> >Mandar, you've really messed up the attributions here.  I am
> >the "chap" to which you refer above.  Thanks for removing all doubt
> >that "male" is the default gender on the net & just about everywhere
> >else.
> >
> 
> For what it's worth the word "chaps" can be used as as a jocular
> equivalent of "everyone"/"all those present" as in "Hey, chaps,
> anyone for a curry?". In this case "chaps" is gender neutral.
> This usage may be limited to parts of the S.E. of England though;
> anyway, that's the only area I've heard it so used.

I agree, think of it as the British version of guys. (Disclaimer: I'm from
the south so what do I know of anything above Watford Gap).

Simon.

-- 
  Simon Patience
  Open Software Foundation			Phone: +33-76-63-48-72
  Research Institute				FAX:   +33-76-51-05-32
  2 Avenue De Vignate				Email: sp@gr.osf.org
  38610 Gieres, France				       uunet!gr.osf.org!sp
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: sp@osf.org (Simon Patience)
Subject: Re: Knives and forks
Organization: Open Software Foundation
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 09:35:47 GMT

In article <glen.724618893@cs.wisc.edu>, glen@slate.cs.wisc.edu (Glen Ecklund) writes:
> sp@osf.org (Simon Patience) writes:
> >Not that this has anything to do with a.e.u. No we are canny enough to put
> >the names on the back of the stem of the fork, or the back of the base
> >(ie the bit in your hand). 
> 
> But which side are you calling the back?  The convex side?  

Yes, the side that doesn't show when placing the fork on the table, prongs
pointing skyward.

> Then you eat
> with the back of the fork.

Yes.

> >> my thumb is pulled back toward the end of the handle).  Also, the most
> >> comfortable angle has the fork approximately parallel to my body, i.e.
> >> both ends of the fork equidistant from my body.
> 
> >Doesn't that make it rather difficult to balance peas on it?
> 
> I guess I failed to remove the ambiguity, after all.  Make that parallel
> to a line between the shoulders.

Perhaps I should have added :-)

Simon.

-- 
  Simon Patience
  Open Software Foundation			Phone: +33-76-63-48-72
  Research Institute				FAX:   +33-76-51-05-32
  2 Avenue De Vignate				Email: sp@gr.osf.org
  38610 Gieres, France				       uunet!gr.osf.org!sp
From: palepink@lily.arts.com (Suzii Abe)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Pins
Date: 18 Dec 92 17:58:04 GMT

> In article <ByurKM.1Is@ibmpcug.co.uk> gtoal@ibmpcug.co.uk (Graham Toal) write
> > As a fellow Brit, I can't give a definitive answer.  But I *think* the
> > USians distinguish between a button (traditional badge - round, tin) and
> > a pin which might be better quality and of some artistic shape.  The
> > old Robertson's Golly badges from childhood would be 'pins' I think.

Pins are decorative; buttons are functional.  Your old Robertson's Golly
badges would have been buttons when first made; they had advertising
function.  (Most buttons here have one of two functions:  they fasten
clothes together, or they express opinions--philosophical, political, or
musicalpreference.)  Eventually, they will be pins, because Robertson's
will no longer be selling the product, or nobody will remember the connection.

The distinction is contextual--a Japanese campaign button becomes a pin
when nobody is around who can read Japanese.

[There is, of course, the other meaning of "pin" as a purely functional
item--straight pins, hair pins, safety pins.  Miss Manners would say that
nice people never see such things on other people's garments, no matter
how visible they are; therefore, they are likewise excluded from this
discussion.]

--Suzii.
From: ringo@icad.com (Amy Gorin)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Note to Mandar
Date: 10 Dec 92 17:18:35 GMT
	<28962@castle.ed.ac.uk> <1fpdsbINNf3s@huon.itd.adelaide.edu.au>
Organization: ICAD Inc., Cambridge, MA


In article <1fpdsbINNf3s@huon.itd.adelaide.edu.au> hoconnel@iti.org (Heath O'Connell) writes:

   cam@castle.ed.ac.uk (Chris Malcolm) writes:

   ... Stuff on BBC accents ...  ... Stuff on Australian accents ...


On a related note, does anyone know how many USan news anchors are
canadian?  When I was studying journalism it was pointed out that
they have an advantage over folks from the US, because to a USan ear, 
educated canadians sound like they "come from nowhere".

(Ted Koppel comes to mind, and also Dan Rather, I think).

-ringo
From: dvldbg@cs.umu.se (Daniel Brahneborg)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: "a" and sthenic
Date: 15 Dec 92 13:28:23 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Computing Science, Umea Univ., 901 87  UMEA  SWEDEN

Hi!

In a book I have about Natural Language Processing they mention the
word "sthenic", and say that "no self-respecting native speaker of
English would dream of using it". Unfortunately neither I nor my
850-pages english dictionary have ever heard of the word.
Anybody have any ideas?

I also wonder about the usage of "a". The same book mentions somewhere
"... logic is too restricted a language ...". Are there any rules for
when to put "a" after the adjectives instead of before? It clearly
only works in a very limited range of situations, I just can't figure
out which.

/Basic
From: mmmirash@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu (Mandar M. Mirashi)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: American English
Date: 15 Dec 92 06:58:20 GMT
Organization: Engineering Computer Network, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA


In article <ByD8xx.354@ccu.umanitoba.ca> ens@ccu.umanitoba.ca () writes:
>>In <28706@castle.ed.ac.uk> cam@castle.ed.ac.uk (Chris Malcolm) writes:
>>>English is now an international language. Americans may form their own
>>>special dialect group if they wish. If they think that weight of
>>>numbers should have something to do with what becomes the standard,
>>>then they should bow out in favour of the more numerous English
>>>speakers of India and Pakistan.
>>
>>It isn't necessary for there to be a single standard of English, but
>>if you're going to bestow favor on the standard of one region or
>>another, some consideration should be given to whether or not English
>>is the native language in the region.
>>
>
>America won't win on this count.  We have a number of native languages
>around here.  I say that "native" doesn't count anyway.  If you speak
>and I (or an Englishperson, to appease Mandar the Great) can 
>understand you, then you're an English speaker.  Cool, you count.
>Don't see any value added in requiring the speakers to have used
>the language from birth.
>

Hey Roger! Are you listening? Here's a chap who doesn't see "native"
as you define it.

                                                       Mandar.
-- 
"Imagine there are no countries. It isn't hard to do. Nothing to kill or die 
 for, and no religion too. Imagine all the people living life in peace.
 You may say that I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one. I hope that some
 day you'll join us, and the world will be as one." - John Lennon.
From: mmmirash@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu (Mandar M. Mirashi)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Note to Mandar
Date: 15 Dec 92 06:35:04 GMT
Organization: Engineering Computer Network, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA

In article <1992Dec15.021703.5108@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> J.Theodore.Schuerzinger@dartmouth.edu (J. Theodore Schuerzinger) writes:
>I thought Ted Koppel was originally from the UK.
>

Arrrggghh...will someone please change that topic?

I made a note of the statement "Ted Koppel was originally from the UK".
Thank you.  

Btw, who's Ted Koppel?   :)


                                                         Mandar.                                                      
-- 
"Imagine there are no countries. It isn't hard to do. Nothing to kill or die 
 for, and no religion too. Imagine all the people living life in peace.
 You may say that I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one. I hope that some
 day you'll join us, and the world will be as one." - John Lennon.
From: iad@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Ivan A Derzhanski)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Sexist language
Date: 16 Dec 92 18:44:43 GMT
Organization: Centre for Cognitive Science, Edinburgh, UK

In article <1992Dec15.022145.24684@bmerh85.bnr.ca> nadeau@bnr.ca (Rheal Nadeau) writes:
>OK, you've convinced me - "he" is gender-neutral.  We have our desired
>unsexist terminology, so henceforth I shall use "he" and its variants
>always, and drop the redundant "she".
>
>"Is Joan here?"  "No, he's not."

Do you normally accept `"Is Joan here?" -- "No, they are not."'?

If you do, please stand up and be counted.  If you don't, then you are
cordially invited to explain why you are pretending not to know what
"gender-neutral" means.

-- 
 `D'ye mind tellin me whit the two o ye are gaun oan aboot?' (The Glasgow
Ivan A Derzhanski  (iad@cogsci.ed.ac.uk; iad@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu)    Gospel)
* Centre for Cognitive Science,  2 Buccleuch Place,  Edinburgh EH8 9LW,  UK
* Cowan House, Pollock Halls, 18 Holyrood Park Road, Edinburgh EH16 5BD, UK
From: iad@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Ivan A Derzhanski)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: alt.usage.english?????
Date: 12 Dec 92 12:42:52 GMT
Organization: Centre for Cognitive Science, Edinburgh, UK

In article <723892551snx@warren.demon.co.uk> leveret@warren.demon.co.uk writes:
<In article <ByJtnp.E6C@constellation.ecn.uoknor.edu> mmmirash@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu (Mandar M. Mirashi) writes:
<>English is spoken only by the English. Others follow variants of English.
<
<Tha knows, me duck, tha's so reet. Ah've nivver 'eard it so well put
<forard. Eh, Ah'll go t'the foot of our stairs! Why, only t'other day as
<Ah nipped up the ginnel (it were black ovver Bill's mutha's, an' Ah were
<feelin' a bit nesh so Ah were hurrying) Ah said t'mesel' "By Eck, them
<Yanks 'aven't gorra clue 'baht 'ow t'speak English!"

Weel then, I'll tell ye this, ma freens -- I cudnae credit it that
puir auld Mandar wud get onie support fae England, but noo I hae nae
doots onie mair.  Ye kin ne'er be shair wi the English.

-- 
 `D'ye mind tellin me whit the two o ye are gaun oan aboot?' (The Glasgow
Ivan A Derzhanski  (iad@cogsci.ed.ac.uk; iad@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu)    Gospel)
* Centre for Cognitive Science,  2 Buccleuch Place,  Edinburgh EH8 9LW,  UK
* Cowan House, Pollock Halls, 18 Holyrood Park Road, Edinburgh EH16 5BD, UK
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: dvldbg@cs.umu.se (Daniel Brahneborg)
Subject: Re: "a" and sthenic
Organization: Dept. of Computing Science, Umea Univ., 901 87  UMEA  SWEDEN
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 14:54:22 GMT

In article <BzDBvK.6IF@cck.coventry.ac.uk> idx009@cck.coventry.ac.uk (the Crisco Kid) writes:
>In article <1992Dec15.180607.10154@hplabsz.hpl.hp.com> kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com writes:
>>In article <BzAyrC.58v@cs.umu.se> dvldbg@cs.umu.se (Daniel Brahneborg) writes:
>>>In a book I have about Natural Language Processing they mention the
>>>word "sthenic", and say that "no self-respecting native speaker of
>>>English would dream of using it". Unfortunately neither I nor my
>>>850-pages english dictionary have ever heard of the word.
>>>Anybody have any ideas?
>>
>>You need a new dictionary! :-)  From M/W NCD:

Sigh. I thought this dictionary was good. I did a rough estimate, and I
think it contains 20-30 thousand words. It is the "Penguin Concise
English Dictionary".

What is "M/W NCD"? I got one reply that suggested I'd take a look
at rutgers, but unfortunately I can't do that.

>And I am a native speaker of (British) English and still have some
>self-respect to boot.

Guess the authours were wrong... :-)

>Who wrote the book?  I'd like to take issue with them.

Gerald Gazdar and Christopher Mellish. The book is called "Natural Language
Processing in LISP. An Introduction to Compuatational Linguistics." There
are also a version for Prolog.

Anyway, thinks for the replies.

/Basic

Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: slb22@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Seth "the Lesser")
Subject: Re: plural of aircraft?
Organization: Generic American College Kids (G.A.C.K.)
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 16:03:37 GMT
Reply-To: slb22@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Seth "the Lesser")
Distribution: na
X-Posted-From: cunixb.cc.columbia.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

watson@pioneer.arc.nasa.gov (John S. Watson - FSC) writes:
>
>We got into a debate over this at lunch yesterday:
>What is the plural or the word "aircraft"? 
>Is it "aircraft" or "aircrafts" or both?

"Aircraft."  "Aircrafts" sounds like teaching flight attendants to make
lanyards and sew leather wallets.

Seth L. Blumberg          \ Warning: This posting has been determined to cause
slb22@columbia.edu (play)   \ cancer in laboratory animals.  Please make sure
sethb@ctr.columbia.edu (work) \ that no white mice are allowed to read it.  
    > No one I know shares my opinions, least of all Columbia University. <