HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: hermit@am.ucsc.edu (William R. Ward)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: "Route"
Date: 2 Sep 92 11:49:22 GMT
	<1992Aug19.133308.10938@news.eng.convex.com>
	<1992Aug20.164443.17699@nessie.mcc.ac.uk>
Reply-To: hermit@bayview.com
Organization: Computing and Telecommunications Services, UCSC
NNTP-Posting-Host: am.ucsc.edu
In-reply-to: segr@nessie.mcc.ac.uk's message of 20 Aug 92 16:44:43 GMT

segr@nessie.mcc.ac.uk (Simon Read) writes:
|"Is the pronunciation of the word route connected to the
|pronunciation of the word tooth?"
|
|I've noticed a distinction between some of us over here who
|use a long vowel, and some of you over there who use a
|short one, as in "tuth". The latter is the pronunciation
|used in Minneapolis (my birthplace), is it limited to the
|Midwest or is it another BrE/AmE thing?

Personally, I pronounce it "twoth."  Just like the number 2, followed
immediately by "th."

But maybe that's just my California accent showing.
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english,sci.lang
From: takoosma@utkvx1.utk.edu (Toby Koosman)
Subject: Re: Can I axe you a question?
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: University of Tennessee Computing Center
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 14:52:00 GMT

I wrote...
>| >|> A lot of the features of Black English are also found in white Southern
>| >|> dialects.  I haven't heard it, but my cohabitor (who has relatives there)
>| >|> claims that everyone on the North Carolina Piedmont sounds black.
(A. Jing Hippy) responded...
>| > 
>| >OOOooooohh!  This from someone in TENN-uh-see?  Your cohabitor needs to
>| >sharpen his or her listening skills.
And in a later post...
>No, I did not at all object to the idea that everyone in the North 
>Carolina piedmont sounds "black".  I did not object at all, in fact.
>I was merely surprised that someone from Tennessee would say something like
>this.  As someone who has heard a very wide variety of "southern" accents
>all of his life, I can tell the difference between north Georgia, south
>Georgia/north Florida, South Carolina, Alabama, Arkansas, parts of Texas,
>east Tennessee and west Tennessee.

I'm confused about why you're surprised that someone in or even from 
Tennessee would make the quoted statement about piedmont speech.  As you note,
people who are not familiar with the South can't tell a piedmont accent
from a Texas drawl.  On the other hand, I don't know why you would suppose
that Tennesseans are able to distinguish similar dialects in a region of
North Carolina--after all, you are apparently unaware that TENN-uh-see is _not_ 
the East Tennessee pronunciation of the state's name.  (Maybe in Union 
County, I dunno.  In Knoxville they say Teyn-uh-SEE just like everyone else.)

N.B.  My cohabitor is an East Tennessee native.  I'm an Angelino.

Toby Koosman
University of Tennessee   Knoxville, Tennessee  USA
Internet: koosman@utkvx.utk.edu     Bitnet: koosman@utkvx
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: vince@Cadence.COM (Vince Gibboni)
Subject: Re: Use of 'I' and 'me'
Organization: Cadence Design Systems, Inc.
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 21:34:41 GMT

dant@techbook.com (Dan Tilque) writes:
>
> Here's two examples I've noticed in the past few weeks:
>
> 2. Bill Clinton used it in a speech.  I don't remember the exact
> context, but it was definitely where the objective case should have
> been used.  

    Hmmm......

    It could just be a coincidence, but I was listening to a radio talk
    show several months ago when someone called in to complain about
    Clinton's use of (a form of) this phrase. The caller rambled on at
    length about this, saying things like "he's s'posed ta be so smart
    and he don't even talk right". The guy was, of couse, dead wrong.
    The phrase which Clinton had used (twice) was "the difference between
    Paul Tsongas and me", which is correct, as "me" is the objective pronoun
    and is being used as the object of a preposition. Now, maybe someone in 
    the Clinton campaign has gotten him to switch to the nominative form
    "the difference between George Bush and I" in the (probably correct) 
    belief that, even though it's wrong, it will sound correct to a greater 
    number of Americans. Sigh.


    ---

      "Don't get just enough education that you go around hating people 
       who look like they may have played football in college or who say 
      'between you and I'".  - Holden Caulfield's teacher


-- 
     "It doesn't have to be terribly prolific !" - Esme
                                                             vince@gda.cadence.com

Disclaimer: I have the world's wonkiest newsfeed.
From: miner@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Improper spelling
Date: 3 Sep 92 21:56:37 CDT
Organization: University of Kansas Academic Computing Services

In article <92246.155543IO11412@MAINE.MAINE.EDU>, <IO11412@MAINE.MAINE.EDU> writes:

Re poor spellers:

[deletions]

> What is the connection between these errors and the fact that people don't
> read books nowadays (almost) and that the overall cultural level tends if
> not to decrease, then at least to shift to a non-praiseworthy state.
> Let the flame war start!
> Dragomir (non-native speaker).

After years of teaching college I am still puzzled by this very
question.  For a long time I thought that poor spelling was due to
little reading: not so.  I've had brilliant and well-read students who
wrote well-thought-out stuff, but had trouble spelling.  I don't think
it has anything to do with how much one reads--but then what does it
have to do with?-- 
********************************** +.............................+
*- Ken <miner@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu>* :All opinions expressed herein:
*There is no privileged position.* :are my own and are not to be :
*	-God, Derrida, others    * : attributed to my employer   :
********************************** +.............................+

Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: lange@iscnvx.lmsc.lockheed.com (Alex Lange)
Subject: Re: Why don't you re-write this . . .
Reply-To: lange@lmsc.lockheed.com
Organization: Moving Finger Rights, Ltd.
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 92 14:08:27 GMT

maj@waikato.ac.nz writes:
: 
: 
: I'm going to use he/she and his/her a lot
: more. Yes it's ugly, but that very ugliness
: reflects accurately the present tension
: between the sexes.

I like your forcefulness.  May I suggest that you use
"s/he"?  This bastardization is _really_ ugly and 
almost androgynous. Besides, it'll completely grab
your reader's attention when s/he stumbles over it.

(If someone has already pointed out this usage,
will s/he forgive me, please?)

Alex
From: iad@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Ivan A Derzhanski)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: New words for gender neutral pronouns in English
Date: 28 Aug 92 18:51:52 GMT
Organization: Centre for Cognitive Science, Edinburgh, UK

In article <87302@netnews.upenn.edu> crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu (Lauren L. Crawford) writes:
>In article <10523@scott.ed.ac.uk> iad@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Ivan A Derzhanski) writes:
>>"He" is masculine (implies maleness).  "They" is plural
>>(implies two or more of 'em).  Now let's suppose you know that you are
>>talking of only one person of unknown sex.  If you use "he", the odds
>>of your being right or wrong are about equal. 
>
>And if you use "she", you'd have the same odds.  So by this logic,
>why not just use "she"?  

By this logic "she" is precisely as good as "he", of course, only it is
not supported by actual usage.  The two pronouns in question ("he" and
"they") have actually been used in English for centuries.  Using "she"
would amount to creating a precedent.

However (in support of the above logic), the possibility for the
feminine pronoun to be chosen as gender-neutral doesn't remain
unrealised: there are a few languages in which this is exactly what
happens (see the discussion on LINGUIST in late March - early April
this year).  Why have Indo-European languages gone the other way?
Just a matter of chance, I think.

-- 
 `If ye hiv ears oan yer heid - then use them tae lissen.' (The Glasgow Gospel)
Ivan A Derzhanski   (iad@cogsci.ed.ac.uk;  iad@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu)
* 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: sp@osf.org (Simon Patience)
Subject: Re: Another Americanism?
Organization: Open Software Foundation
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 05:45:54 GMT

In article <1992Aug28.021535.25829@sq.sq.com>, msb@sq.sq.com (Mark Brader) writes:
> > The use of "for" here is perfectly correct to these British ears. The US 
> > version using "in" always jars slightly.
> 
> Ah, so you not only use "for", but you don't use "in".  For :-) that case,
> how would you translate this example into your English?
> 
> 	It's good to be healthy again.  Last night was the first
> 	time that I slept for eight hours in a week.

	It's good to be healthy again.  Last night was the first
	time that I had eight hours sleep for a week.

Or if you really push me I would say "slept for eight hours for a week".

> (I would find it more natural to put "in a week" directly after "time",
> but that's only a matter of style.  The above version seems correct to
> me, just slightly awkward.)

I agree, your version seems awkward, thus it jars slightly. However, it's 
perfectly parsable (dontcha just hate that word!).

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: cam@castle.ed.ac.uk (Chris Malcolm)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Improper spelling
Date: 3 Sep 92 10:27:06 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University

In article <1992Sep2.225412.9559@hplabsz.hpl.hp.com> evan@hpl.hp.com (Evan Kirshenbaum) writes:

>is an example of one of the few real changes going on in English (or,
>at least, American) orthography: the removal of "gh".  This one seems
>to have been driven by advertising, but has been moving for a while.
>I have seen (intentionally used) "nite","frite", "lite", "tho"

Replacing "night" with "nite" seems pretty silly to those versions of
English (such as Scottish) which pronounce the "gh".

>"draft" is already the usual spelling of the British "draught".

In the UK the distinction is drawn between "draft" as in version and
"draught" as in liquid measure or small breeze. Using "draft" for the
lot seems just a foolish confusion leading to ambiguity.
-- 
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
From: roger@crux.Princeton.EDU (Roger Lustig)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Problem with 'they' (etc) as 3p singular common gender pron.
Date: 1 Sep 92 15:29:31 GMT
Organization: Princeton University
Originator: news@nimaster

In article <10584@scott.ed.ac.uk> iad@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Ivan A Derzhanski) writes:
>In article <1992Aug31.182114.929@Princeton.EDU> mikulska@crux.Princeton.EDU (Margaret Mikulska) writes:
>>Grammar and usage are still taught in a pre- and
>>proscriptive way rather than descriptively.

>Actually, this is not quite true - I was already a reasonable speaker
>of English when I heard that some grammarians thought stranding your
>prepositions was a bad idea.  It made no sense to me - not just
>because I had been taught to strand mine, but because for me it was
>such an attractively exotic feature of the language, and I couldn't
>see why we shouldn't avail ourselves of it.

>And it was only about a year ago that I first heard about splitting
>infinitives being a sin.  I hadn't been taught that either.

According to an article I once found in the journal of the Society
for Pure English (ca '30s), this "prohibition" arose when someone
noted that the infinitive is a single word in Latin ,and reasoned
that it should be treated the same way in English.  Of course, the
'to' in the "infinitive" as taught isn't really part of the 
infinitive, just a preposition added to create the analogy to the
usual meaning of a Latin infinitive!  So the whole thing arose from
a not-too-perceptive definition.

Roger
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: lange@iscnvx.lmsc.lockheed.com (Alex Lange)
Subject: Re: To look for (German: suchen)
Reply-To: lange@lmsc.lockheed.com
Organization: Moving Finger Rights, Ltd.
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 92 14:01:16 GMT

bf455@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Bonita Kale) writes:
: 
: References: <1992Sep1.062445.3555@wega.rz.uni-ulm.de>  
: 
: 
: In a previous article, RAHLFS@BEATE.RZ.FH-ULM.DE (RZ D. Rahlfs) says:
: 
: >Is someone able to explain the difference between:
: 
: I can't resist displaying my ignorance, so here you are:

Me, neither.

: 
: to seek for s.th.   to seek after s.th.  = People use these, especially
: the latter, but they may be redundancies.  You can seek after knowledge, I
: guess, but I'd rather leave out the "for" and "after".  (You can, however,
: seek -to- do something; it means you try to do it.)

"To seek after something" has the implication that the goal
is lofty, sometimes unattainable, as in "a seeker after truth";
the seeker may be high-minded but overly idealistic.  This usage
is sometimes derisive.

At least, that's how it looks to me...

Alex
From: fish@hpscit.sc.hp.com (John Fisher)
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 20:50:40 GMT
Subject: Re: Ships and countries
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Santa Clara, CA
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english

sommar@enea.se (Erland Sommarskog) writes:

.....

>It is not unusual that a country is personified by a woman,
>"Mother Russia" or "Moder Svea" (that's Sweden) for instance,
>so the use of "she" seems very plausible at least in more poetic
>contexts. But is the use of "she" as a pronoun for any country
>common among native speakers in every-day language?
>-- 
>Erland Sommarskog - ENEA Data, Stockholm - sommar@enea.se
>F|rst till kvarn f}r f|rst vankiva
>----------

I recall a discussion in a class in college, lo these many years ago, on
this subject.  We were told that all peoples in the world, save one,
refer to their countries as either mother or father (i.e. Mother Russia,
the Fatherland - Germany).  The one exception... the U.S.A.  Our only
reference in this area is to a non-immediate family member: Uncle Sam.

Seemed plausible at the time.


John Fisher at Hewlett-Packard |
in Santa Clara, CA             |  Insanity is just a state of mind.
fish@hpscit.hp.com             | 
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener)
Subject: University
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 01:00:02 GMT

A few remarks/questions about the use of the word "university"

I notice that many people in the UK use expressions like "He's at
university" whereas an American would always say "He's at college,"
even if the college is a university.  Anyone have an explanation other
than just a basic US/UK difference?

Similarly, I often see Australians abbreviate the word university as
"Uni."  Americans would always write "Univ." (or sometimes just "U")
if they wanted to abbreviate it.  I've seen 'Uni" used in the midst of
written paragraphs, so I wonder...  is "Uni" an abbreviation used in
Australian speech, also?  What's the situation with the abbreviation
in the UK?


--
Gabe Wiener - Columbia Univ.     "This 'telephone' has too many shortcomings 
gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu       to be seriously considered as a means of 
N2GPZ in ham radio circles        communication. The device is inherently of
72355,1226 on CI$                 no value to us." -Western Union memo, 1877
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: harper@oracorp.com (Douglas Harper)
Subject: Re:  Hross
Organization: ORA Corporation, Ithaca, New York
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 17:01:54 GMT

In article <1992Aug26.232637.985@dragon.com> cms@dragon.com (Spawn of a Jewish Carpenter (Cindy Smith)) writes:
>
> Speaking of metathesis....
>
> "Horse" originally comes from "hross," whence, I suspect, "Hoss" 
>Cartwright got his name.  The writers/developers of Bonanza must have 
>had a sense of humor.

OK, I'll bite.  Why do you suspect anything so elaborate?  Why not
simply suspect that the writers had the fictional Nevadans nickname him
"Horse" and pronounce it "Hoss"?

-- 
Douglas Harper     | ORA Corporation | 301A Dates Drive | Ithaca, NY 14850 
harper@oracorp.com | (607) 277-2020  | FAX: 277-3206    | USA

Sig quotes available upon request.
From: bf455@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Bonita Kale)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Women Doctors
Date: 2 Sep 1992 11:11:00 GMT
Organization: A poorly-installed InterNetNews site
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc10.ins.cwru.edu




In a previous article, hermit@am.ucsc.edu (William R. Ward) says:

>g92h7147@giraffe.ru.ac.za (MR GR HUTCHISON) writes:
>>"Boy wonders" has me stumped! Perhaps it is just one of those stock 
>>phrases...
>
>Well, I think "boy wonder" is supposed to be an inverted form of
>"wonder boy"; while this is still far from `correct' usage, I don't
>think it is in the same category as "women drivers" et al.
>
>Your mileage may vary, however.
>


"Boy wonder" is a precocious success.  He is a boy as opposed to a man,
not as opposed to a girl. 

Bonita Kale

Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: uhschreg@cip.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Ulrich Schreglmann)
Subject: Re: Gender Benders!
Organization: Student Pool, CSD, University of Erlangen, Germany
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 1992 14:55:49 GMT

On Aug 20, James Copeland wrote:

>All of this gender bender stuff has me asking the following question:
>Don't you hate it when people use the words "gender" and "sex" interchangably
>One example is when filling out forms which ask for your gender instead of
>your sex.

Probably just to avoid the answer "Yes, please!" :-)


May the Cool Be with You!

(C)OOL mcmxcii
From: jitze@svl.cdc.com (Jitze Couperus)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: A Neologism
Date: 3 Sep 92 00:18:41 GMT

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

>In article <1992Sep1.233118.15985@nmsu.edu> sabbott@nmsu.edu (SDA) writes:

>>Literatify - to create an adjective from a literary character or
>>object.

>>Here are literafisms I have collected, can anyone think of others?

Sisyphean...
--
Jitze Couperus          Control Data - Silicon Valley Operations
jitze@svl.cdc.com       Voice (408) 496-4334  FAX (408) 496-4106
From: iad@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Ivan A Derzhanski)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: How should we decline singular 'they' ?
Date: 28 Aug 92 14:24:49 GMT
Organization: Centre for Cognitive Science, Edinburgh, UK

In article <1992Aug27.064910.22219@Princeton.EDU> mikulska@astro.Princeton.EDU (Margaret Mikulska) writes:
<In article <1992Aug27.095508.10385@waikato.ac.nz> maj@waikato.ac.nz writes:
<>How should we decline singular 'they' ?
<
<We shouldn't and we don't.

Yes, you should.  And you do.  There is an objective (aka oblique,
accusative, dative) form, namely "them".

-- 
 `If ye hiv ears oan yer heid - then use them tae lissen.' (The Glasgow Gospel)
Ivan A Derzhanski   (iad@cogsci.ed.ac.uk;  iad@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu)
* Centre for Cognitive Science,  2 Buccleuch Place,  Edinburgh EH8 9LW,  UK
* Cowan House, Pollock Halls, 18 Holyrood Park Road, Edinburgh EH16 5BD, UK
From: segr@nessie.mcc.ac.uk (Simon Read)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: University
Date: 2 Sep 92 09:49:27 GMT
Organization: Manchester Computing Centre

In article <Bttxr1.KB7@comp.vuw.ac.nz>, brian@comp.vuw.ac.nz (Brian Boutel)
writes:

>In article <1992Aug31.010002.9082@news.columbia.edu>, gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu
>(Gabe M Wiener) writes:
>
>> A few remarks/questions about the use of the word "university"
>> 
>> I notice that many people in the UK use expressions like "He's at
>> university" whereas an American would always say "He's at college,"
>> even if the college is a university.  Anyone have an explanation other
>> than just a basic US/UK difference?
>> 
>> Similarly, I often see Australians abbreviate the word university as
>> "Uni."  Americans would always write "Univ." (or sometimes just "U")
>> if they wanted to abbreviate it.  I've seen 'Uni" used in the midst of
>> written paragraphs, so I wonder...  is "Uni" an abbreviation used in
>> Australian speech, also?  What's the situation with the abbreviation
>> in the UK?
>
>Here in New Zealand, the use in speech of "uni" is a mark of an Australian,
>NZers say "varsity". This is a British term, which, I suspect, went out of use in
>its homeland about 50 years ago.
>
>BTW, here, "college" means "high school".

Obviously the Australian soap "Neighbours", (or even "Home and Away")
hasn't reached the cable stations in the US yet. (And long may it be so).
Otherwise the original poster would KNOW that the Australian use Uni in
speech.

I'm interested to know that "varsity" is used in NZ though. It has almost
disappeared here in the UK. It's used as an adjective: the "Varsity
Match"; Inter-varsity Croquet; etc. Mostly though for Oxbridge stuff, and
hence thought to be pretentious.

Here we would tend to use then name of the University, so most people
would say "when I was at UMIST" (providing this was the establishment to
which they went). To describe going into the campus we would use say
"into the University" (I use going "to work" along with most of my fellow
PostGrads), going "to the University" is having been accepted for a
course. Campus is a word that is very rarely used, it tends to be
regarded as a sign of being from the other side of the Pond.

There is however no general understanding of the phrases. It certainly
doesn't play the same part in everyday life as Oz/US soaps would have us
believe it does there. Most people use "college" (here this means an
establishment giving basically vocational education to 16-18 year olds)
or "school" when they ask "so where are you going to <insert word>?".


Simon Read
----------
Simon.Read@umist.ac.uk