HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu (Lauren L. Crawford)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: "This" weekend vs. "Next" weekend
Date: 28 Jul 92 18:26:41 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

In article <1992Jul25.151025.16685@news.columbia.edu> gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) writes:
>I'm a native New Yorker, and I too will say "this weekend" for the
>weekend coming up, and "next weekend" to the weekend AFTER.  However,
>my usage is a little different.  On Monday morning, for instance, I would
>use "this weekend" to refer to the weekend that had just taken place,
>and would specify the approaching weekend with "this coming weekend."
>However, by tuesday or wednesday, "this weekend" means the coming weekend,
>and "next weekend" means the one after.



I'm from the Midwest but have lived on the East Coast for 10 years.  I
basically switch all over the place and am thoroughly confused.  This made
for lots of fun when I was chief copy editor for a local magazine.


.
-- 
===============================================================================
Lauren Crawford  //  crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu
"What a waste it is to lose one's mind, or not to have a mind is being very
wasteful.  How true that is."--J. Danforth Quayle to United Negro College Fund 
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: Tom Christiansen <tchrist@convex.COM>
Subject: Re: "French" spacing (was: How many spaces after a period?)
Originator: tchrist@pixel.convex.com
Reply-To: tchrist@convex.COM (Tom Christiansen)
Organization: CONVEX Realtime Development, Colorado Springs, CO
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 20:45:25 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

From the keyboard of eepjm@wombat.newcastle.edu.au (Peter Moylan):
:One which has always amused me is "filet americain": American fillet.

What's a fillet?  We only use it at the filling stations, where
you can request that they fillet up. :-)

Really, it's a filet around here, and pronounced like ballet and beret:
with the accent on the *last syllable* instead of the barbaric first, 
and without a final t, the way God and Gaul meant them to be.  :-)

--tom
-- 
    Tom Christiansen      tchrist@convex.com      convex!tchrist

	    Pronunciation -- think of Psyche!
	    Is a paling stout and spikey?
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: mmmirash@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu (Mandar Mukund Mirashi)
Subject: Re: English English versus *American* English
Organization: Engineering Computer Network, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 17:25:26 GMT

In article <1992Jul30.062825.15929@midway.uchicago.edu> goer@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>mmmirash@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu (Mandar Mukund Mirashi) writes:
>Perhaps I shouldn't enjoy this so much.
>
>Mandar, who are these original speakers?  Are they the Saxons?  Are they
>the many Norse tribes that settled throughout England, and left a per-
>manent linguistic mark on the countryside?  Are they the Normans who con-
>tributed so mightily to our vocabulary, and who eventually adopted the
>language in toto?
>
>
       You are going back to stage when the language was in its infancy...
...but before the English  established colonies in America, the English
language had stabilised to a fair extent. This is why I claim that the
English are the original speakers.



>Mandar, you again have selective "hearing," ignoring many sensible things
>that have been said, in efforts to preserve this preoccupation you have
>with the Brits.  As one poster pointed out, spelling has fluctuated sub-
>stantially throughout the last few centuries, and American conventions have
>no more or less claim to "originality" than do British ones.  The American
>dialect(s) are also no more or less "original" than the various British
>dialects, and so the situation there is analogous.  

NO THEY ARE NOT!!!!

>In fact, you'll find
>may archaic features of English preserved in American speech that are
>being lost in Britain, and surely vice-versa as well.
>
Only the original speakers of the language have the authority to
change it (at least, as far as word spellings go!).

>Language is a glorious thing.

Yep......I agree totally!   :)
>
>Personally, my guess is that all your life you've been taught to value
>emulation of a specific English dialect, and that you find it hard to look
>back on your conditioning, and do the right thing:  Laugh!

Do you laugh at standards set? Do you laugh at road signs? Do you
laugh at the law of the country? 

>
>I can't wait until you travel to Australia.
>
>-- 
>
>   -Richard L. Goerwitz              goer%midway@uchicago.bitnet
>   goer@midway.uchicago.edu          rutgers!oddjob!ellis!goer

That would pose no problem......as far as I know, I have come across 
mangled spellings only in the US. Could you list some mangled spellings
from "Australian" English? 
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: Tom Christiansen <tchrist@convex.COM>
Subject: Re: English English versus *American* English
Originator: tchrist@convex.convex.com
Reply-To: tchrist@convex.COM (Tom Christiansen)
Organization: CONVEX Realtime Development, Colorado Springs, CO
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 00:07:08 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

From the keyboard of mmmirash@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu (Mandar Mukund Mirashi):
:(first time I am hearing about him..) 

But not first time I am hearing funny words from wannabe Englishman this.  
(Be adding singsong where appropriate.)

--tom
-- 
"GUIs normally make it simple to accomplish simple actions and impossible
to accomplish complex actions."   --Doug Gwyn  (22/Jun/91 in comp.unix.wizards)

     Tom Christiansen           tchrist@convex.com      convex!tchrist
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: lange@iscnvx.lmsc.lockheed.com (Alex Lange)
Subject: Re: I'm so gay
Reply-To: lange@lmsc.lockheed.com
Organization: Moving Finger Writes, Inc.
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 14:06:33 GMT

: >   Is the original meaning of "gay" lost forever? Would it be futile
: >   to wrestle it back from oblivion? 
: 
: No, it would be impossible.
: 
Historians in the future will have a nice ambiguity to deal with:
the Gay Nineties.

Alex Lange
From: dand@buscard.fidonet.org (Dan Davidson)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: use of generic terms 
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 20:31:17 EDT
X-Maildoor: WaflineMail 1.00r

  => In a message to All on 07-29-92  01:26 Kate Juliff said:

 KJ> Some time ago, someone posted an article with an extract from
 KJ> a piece of work that used the word "white" where "men" would normally
 KJ> appear, in order to illustrate the effect of using the word "men" to
 KJ> include women.

Using "men" to include women sounds peculiar to me.  A device common
in English for centuries is the use of "man" to mean mankind, not at
all the same thing.

                                                   -- Dan --

                      +------------------------------+
                      |   dand@buscard.fidonet.org   |
                      +------------------------------+
                      |       Dan Davidson           |
                      +------------------------------+



... Ad astra per aspera (or, I'll never get off the ground)
--- Blue Wave/QWK v2.10
             
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: sav@nanette.sni.de (Dr.Savory)
Subject: Re: More uniquer
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 06:03:25 GMT
Organization: Siemens Nixdorf Info.Sys. AG, Paderborn, Germany


How about the philosophy exam question:

     Define the meaning of the term "universe" and give two examples.

Ciao,
     Stu
From: cla04@seq1.keele.ac.uk (A.T. Fear)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: English English versus *American* English
Date: 30 Jul 92 09:20:12 GMT
Organization: University of Keele, England

>> The Indian community in the US adapts to American English in the
>> second generation as quickly as any other immigrant group has done.
>> The same, btw, is true for Pakistanis and Nigerians, not to mention
>> Australians, New Zealanders, and Canadians.  
 
> And indeed the English.
 

This is true and tragic. As the poet once said, "facilis descensus
Averno". We must remain on our guard or this tide of corruption will
sweep us all away.


Andy
From: wilcox@vax.oxford.ac.uk
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Sound-Bite?
Date: 30 Jul 92 12:46:31 GMT
Organization: Oxford University VAXcluster

In article <9207292154.AA04952@ha06.eng.ua.edu>, bkannan@ha06.eng.ua.edu (Balaji Kannan) writes:
> 
> 
>   Could someone explain what a sound-bite is?

A sound-bite is a ten-second (or so) pithy aphorism, for presentation on the
evening news.

>   What is its origin?
> 
According to some TV networks, people have a fifteen-second attention span.
Politicians like their audience to listen o them, hence the sound-bite.

>   Who is a policy-wonk?

That's an Americanism. I've never heard it!

>   Does ad-libbing mean just extempore speech or more than that?
> 
Just that.

>   How did these originate?
> 
The verb "to ad-lib" comes from the adverbial phrase "ad libitum", meaning "at
liberty".

-- 

Stephen Wilcox             |   Remember what happened to the dinosaurs!
wilcox@maths.oxford.ac.uk  |    I did---and look what happened to me.
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: SB
Subject: An Indian Response
Originator: ac05@sol
Organization: University of North Texas
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 13:54:17 GMT

Mandar Mukund obviously has no idea what he's talking about.  If people weren't
allowed to change the language, how could we Indians make such obvious
improvements to English as cousin-brother, cousin-sister, maternal-uncle-on
-my-father's side, among others?

In view of these and other splendid contributions we have made to the English
language, I am sure that the readership of this newsgroup will excuse us for
Mr. Mukund -- there's always one in every 800 million persons.

SB
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: jhoskins@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (James M Hoskins)
Subject: Re: Words that peeve me
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 18:00:02 GMT

In article <4821@unixhub.SLAC.Stanford.EDU> esr@unixhub.SLAC.Stanford.EDU (Edwi
n S. Russell) writes:
>> > Contributions are encouraged.
>>
>> "Roast beef with au jus" in menus.
>
>Potatoes au gratin with cheese.

Sign on bus for car body shop:  Quality is no accident.
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: scobbie@Csli.Stanford.EDU (Jim Scobbie)
Subject: Re: English English versus *American* English
Organization: Stanford University CSLI
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 23:29:02 GMT

In <1992Jul29.203036.25275@constellation.ecn.uoknor.edu> mmmirash@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu (Mandar Mukund Mirashi) writes:

>      Exactly the point which was trying to drive home....no single
>individual has the authority to change the language. The spelling 
>can be changed only if a majority of it's native speakers (I mean
>the English, here) concur. You chaps seem to have wreaked a war on
>the language, which is most shameful! Why deface such a beautiful 
>language?



If it is so awful for one individual in many to try to change the
language of the many, why is it acceptable for one nation in many
to do it? "English" is not the property of the English, nor even 
that minority of them who speak standard English as their native
language. It belongs to all of us who speak it.
-- 
James M. Scobbie: Dept of Linguistics, Stanford University, CA 94305-2150, USA
                  scobbie@csli.stanford.edu
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: mcoffin@IASTATE.EDU (Marie Coffin)
Subject: Re: "This" weekend vs. "Next" weekend
Reply-To: mcoffin@IASTATE.EDU (Marie Coffin)
Organization: Iowa State University
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 20:34:44 GMT

In article <1992Jul25.064116.13892@news.columbia.edu>,
jml12@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Jonathan M Lennox) writes:
>   I noticed recently in a conversation with someone a difference of
> usage between different areas of the U.S.  I distinguish between
> "this" weekend and "next" weekend, so that the former is the weekend
> immediately following the time I am talking about, whereas the latter
> is the weekend after that.  This similarly applies to days of the
> week.
> 
>   However, I have run across many people who do not make this
> distinction--both "this" weekend and "next" weekend refer to the one
> directly following.  Needless to say, this has caused some confusion
> when I am not thinking about my usage...
> 
>   I am from Massachusetts--I think the usage may be constrained to the
> northeast U.S.  I know that it is not used in the Midwest.
> 
>   Any comments?  Is this distinction made anywhere else in the
> English-speaking world?
> 
> Jonathan Lennox
> jml12@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu

It is used on parts of the Midwest, such as here in Iowa.  A friend of mine,
who learned to speak English as a teenager in Chicago, tried to convince me
recently that the usage is illogical, citing examples such as "next exit on
the interstate".  I'm not sure who won the argument, but it sure did make
interesting conversation for a few days.  ;-)

Marie Coffin
From: crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu (Lauren L. Crawford)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: English English versus *American* English
Date: 29 Jul 92 20:55:18 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

In article <1992Jul29.200521.23765@constellation.ecn.uoknor.edu> mmmirash@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu (Mandar Mukund Mirashi) writes:
> All you Amercians out there....do not spoil the
>English language (in other words, lay off! Keep away!, etc.)

O.K.  Let's all speak French now.




-- 
===============================================================================
Lauren Crawford  //  crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu
"What a waste it is to lose one's mind.  Or not to have a mind.  How true  
that is." -- J. Danforth Quayle at United Negro College Fund luncheon
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: slagle@lmsc.lockheed.com (Mark Slagle)
Subject: Re: More unique?  polique!
Reply-To: slagle@lmsc.lockheed.com
In-reply-to: mcoffin@IASTATE.EDU's message of Wed, 22 Jul 1992 19:53:01 GMT
Organization: Lockheed Missiles and Space Co., Sunnyvale, Ca.
	<1992Jul22.095143.3030@desire.wright.edu>
	<1992Jul22.145301@IASTATE.EDU>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 03:10:08 GMT

In article <1992Jul22.145301@IASTATE.EDU>, mcoffin@IASTATE.EDU (Marie Coffin) writes:

> Um, Ted, I don't know how to tell you this, but...polynomial and polystyrene
> both have the short 'i' sound too.  A brief (very brief!) perusal of my
> dictionary indicates that "poly" words take the short 'i' sound if poly-
> is followed by a consonant, and take the long 'e' sound if poly-  is 
> followed by a vowel (e.g. polyandry, polyester).  

Oh?

In the first place, polystyrene is pronounced with a long
"e", not a short "i", which violates your rule

And what about:
  polytonal
  polytheism
  polytechnic
  polyzoic
  polysyllabic

and so on for a very long way.  You need a better rule.

> So it seems to me "polyque"
> would be pronounced 'pol-li-queue' or possibly 'pol-lick' or even (someone
> else suggested this!) 'pol-li-kay'.  My own vote is for 'pol-lick'.  

I would be inclined to spell it "polique", but in either
case I would pronounce it as "pol-eek", in parallel with
unique.

--
----
Mark E. Slagle                                 PO Box 61059
slagle@lmsc.lockheed.com                       Sunnyvale, CA   94088
408-756-0895                                   USA
From: smith@ctron.com (Larry Smith)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: "French" spacing (was: How many spaces after a period?)
Date: 31 Jul 92 19:15:33 GMT
Reply-To: smith@ctron.com
Organization: Cabletron Systems, Inc.

>In article <1992Jul23.105011.1@wombat.newcastle.edu.au> eepjm@wombat.newcastle.edu.au (Peter Moylan) writes:

>>One which has always amused me is "filet americain": American fillet.
>>This refers to a dish made with uncooked ground beef.  (Not just lightly
>>cooked, but completely uncooked.)

Interesting.  Never heard it called that.  It's always called "steak tartare".
Although one restaurant I know of called it "steak tartar", though you had to
order the actual tartar sauce separately ;)

Larry Smith (smith@ctron.com) No, I don't speak for Cabletron.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Daily I'd go over to Congress - that grand old benevolent national asylum - and
report on the inmates there.  Never seen a body of men with tongues more handy,
or information more uncertain.  If one of those men had been present when the
Deity was on the point of saying "Let there be light" we never would've had it.
From: wilcox@vax.oxford.ac.uk
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: English English versus *American* English
Date: 30 Jul 92 13:08:25 GMT
Organization: Oxford University VAXcluster

mmmirash@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu (Mandar Mukund Mirashi) flames away:
> cummings@milton.u.washington.edu (Michael Cummings) writes:
>>	BTW, do you think English in England is standardized?
 
>     The one taught in English high schools is....
> 
Mandar, dear, if you knew anything at all about England and English English,
you would know that "high school" does not exist here but is a Nasty American
Neologism [TM]

>>	That's unfortunate.  It's unfortunate that you can't take the sort
>>of charitable attitude with Americans that you seem to wish others would
>>take with you.  I find it enriching whenever I meet people from other parts
>>of the world.  I certainly wouldn't call them "a bunch of idiots" if I
>>didn't care for their use of language.
> 
> Colloquial variants are indeed welcome....but when you go around changing
> the spellings of words....Grrrrr.... :)
>       Usage of wrong English in the written format is impardonable....either
> the wrongdoer should be corrected.....or else, called an idiot if he 
> refuses to correct himself.

OK. "You are an idiot". 

>      How many variants of spellings exist for commonly spelt English 
> words?? You ask why I am outraged by them....well, if there is no
> standard enforced, people will come up with  a whole variety of spellings
> for a single word, and insist that their version is the right one..just
> like you Americans have. Luckily, so far the phenomenon has confined itself to
> America and a few other countries. Imagine the day when every person (not
> just country) follows a different set of spellings...there would be total
> chaos.....no one would be able to understand the other person!
> 
Welle, Mandar, i am sur thatte thou hast red some of Mr Shakespyr his estimable
workes in an hystorical version that hath not hadde its spellynge moddernized.
Then thinkest thou upon the myriad scholastici whoo hav understoden hym.
A veritable myracl!

>        I am quite a neutral observer. I learnt my English neither in
> England nor in America. I was taught the British English, but since I
> am quite an avid reader, was exposed to American spellings too. How very
> impudent of you to call your corruption of the language an "improvement"!
> The English are NOT backward, they are the bastions of the English language
> standards.

One last time, and this time from a Native speaker of Oxford English. 
American English is correct in the USA. British English is correct in the UK. I
write "colour" and "standardise". A USAmerican writes "color" and
"standardize". We are *both* correct.
-- 

Stephen Wilcox             |   Remember what happened to the dinosaurs!
wilcox@maths.oxford.ac.uk  |    I did---and look what happened to me.
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: m1b@rayssd.ssd.ray.com (Barone)
Subject: Useful quote concerning Mandar Mukund Mirashi
Organization: Raytheon Submarine Signal Division, Portsmouth, RI
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 15:14:48 GMT

With reasonable men, I will reason; with humane men I will plead; but to
Mandar Mukund Mirashi I will give no quarter, nor waste arguments where
they will certainly be lost.   
				(paraphrased from William Lloyd Garrison)

The true quote uses "tyrants" where I replaced his name, but it seems
appropriate.  This one person is dictating how over 260 million people
should spell.  Further, Mandar has responded to well reasoned arguments
with diatribes.  He's going into my KILL file.
-- 
Joe Barone
m1b@rayssd.ssd.ray.com
Gentlemen!  You can't fight in here!  This is the War Room!
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: Tom Christiansen <tchrist@convex.COM>
Subject: Re: What is a "Homie" or a "Homeboy" ???
Originator: tchrist@pixel.convex.com
Keywords: slang, jargon, homie, homeboy, definition_wanted
Reply-To: tchrist@convex.COM (Tom Christiansen)
Organization: CONVEX Realtime Development, Colorado Springs, CO
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 22:42:46 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

From the keyboard of parsons@osiris.cso.uiuc.edu (Mark Parsons):
:	It is definately not deragatory, but it isn't specifically
:complementary either.  

Nor even complimentary. :-)

It is often used as an address for a friend like "Hey
:homes!  What's up?", but it can also be a more general reference like
:"Homeboy's (that guy) crazy!".  It comes from urban black America and I
:think originally referred to someone from your own neighborhood, but it's

But it's a funny thing, this "its", business.  Honest, I took a parsing
hit with the "it's" at the end of the sentence.  I hate it when my 
parser has to backtrack.  Slows down the reading.

I'm really much nicer in person. :-)

--tom
-- 
    Tom Christiansen      tchrist@convex.com      convex!tchrist
  "The most merciful thing in this world, I think, is the inability of
  the human mind to correlate all its contents..."   
	    --H.P. Lovecraft, from "The Call of Chthulu", 1926.
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: padutton@wpi.WPI.EDU (Peter Alan Dutton)
Subject: Re: right time
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 20:05:16 GMT

In article <1992Jul29.142551.7886@vax.oxford.ac.uk> wilcox@vax.oxford.ac.uk writes:
>In article <glen.712359608@cs.wisc.edu>, glen@slate.cs.wisc.edu (Glen Ecklund) writes:
>> Also note that in the U.S. we always use a colon, e.g. "6:45", never "6.45".
>> I understand that both are used Down Under.  Is that right?
>> The period makes it look decimal to me.
>
>Hmmmm..... Always? That looks like a sweeping generalisation to me.
>FWIW, the following are all used in the UK:
>
>
>6:45      6.45          6 45           6-45          0645  

Funny how some sweeping generalizations are true. In the US, one would
ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS use a colon.

OK, except for the millitary - they'd use 0645. But OTHER THAN THAT...

In the US it's:
6:45 meaning six-forty-five (as in time)
6.45 meaning six and forty-five hundredths (six-point-four-five)
6,450 meaning six-thousand, four-hundred, and fifty

Always,
Peter





Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: eepjm@wombat.newcastle.edu.au (Peter Moylan)
Subject: Re: Use of "dereference"
Organization: University of Newcastle, AUSTRALIA
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 04:01:39 GMT

Larry> No, it's just a made-up inverse of the verb reference.

Dhanesh> I can't let this go by without comment: the verb form is "refer."

I'm rarely in favour of the unnecessary verbing of nouns, but I think
we have an exception here.  When talking about computer programs,
there is a difference between "referencing an object" and "referring
to an object".  The distinction is probably not needed in technical
English, but it's important in this particular branch of jargon.

Dhanesh> Then again, I refuse to use "research" except as a noun, so what do I know?

Again, it depends.  I would never use "research" as a verb when talking
about my own work; but I have met others of whom it could be said
that all they do is re-search.

Peter.
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english