HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: simon@fsinfo.cs.uni-sb.de (Julia Simon)
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Subject: Re: Need help with Mongolian (Urdu)
Date: 21 Dec 1992 11:45:07 GMT
Organization: Fachschaft Computerlinguistik, U of Saarland, FRG
NNTP-Posting-Host: fsinfo.cs.uni-sb.de

tariqh@dcs.qmw.ac.uk (Tariq Hamid) writes:
> While we're on the subject the Hindi and Urdu languages are almost identical,
> except for the fact that Hindi is written in Devanagri script and Urdu is
> written in Arabic/Persian script. This difference is due to the nationalistic
> tendencies of the rulers of India and Pakistan. After independence, from the
> British in 1947, the Indians decided to write the language known as
> "Hindustani" in the Devanagri script, the ancient script in which Sanskrit is
> written.

I've heard there is another difference - the Urdu-speaking people use more
words of Persian/Arabian origin than the Hindi-speaking people. The latter, it
is said, do not only use the Indian word rather than the other one (if there
are synonyms) but even revive old Sanskrit words in order to have "words of
their own" and to not have to use the "foreign" ones...

Is this right? Or is it just another rumor spread by my (indeed very small)
"Teach Yourself Hindustani" book?

			Julia 8-)

 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
				Julia Simon

 Fachschaftsrat Computerlinguistik	DIaLOGIKa GmbH
 Fachbereich 8.7, Bau 17, Zi. 201
 Universit"at des Saarlandes		Albertstr., Pascalschacht
 D-W-6600 Saarbr"ucken, Germany		D-W-6602 Dudweiler, Germany

			email: simon@fsinfo.cs.uni-sb.de
			       sileas@coli.uni-sb.de
 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: delancey@darkwing.uoregon.edu (Scott C DeLancey)
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Subject: Re: Wanted:'why KILL does not mean CAUSE TO DIE'
Date: 22 Dec 1992 00:35:42 GMT
Organization: University of Oregon Network Services
Distribution: sci
NNTP-Posting-Host: darkwing.uoregon.edu
Keywords: generative semantics, Wierzbicka, causatives

In article <1h5012EINN3ei@uni-erlangen.de> geissler@jupiter.linguistik.uni-erlangen.de (Stefan Geissler) writes:
>
>Someone told me about an article (which maybe a couple of years old)
>with the title 'why KILL does not mean CAUSE TO DIE'. 
>That sounds quite interesting for something I have to write right now,
>but I haven't been able to find out where this article was published.
>
Anna Wierzbicka, in _Foundations of Language_, sometime in the early-mid
70's.  (Sorry, I can't find a more precise reference ready to hand).
Look through other volumes of FoL from the early 70's; Wierzbicka's
article follows several others presenting various stances on the lexical
decomposition analysis of cauative verbs like 'kill'.

-- 
Scott DeLancey			delancey@darkwing.uoregon.edu
Department of Linguistics
University of Oregon
Eugene, OR 97403, USA
From: aeb@cwi.nl (Andries Brouwer)
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Subject: Re: Need help with Mongolian (Urdu)READ/NEW/FOLLOWUP
Date: 24 Dec 92 13:46:11 GMT

bierbach@guvax.acc.georgetown.edu writes:

> I had always thought that the word `Urdu' was completely 
>Indo-European in origin, since I remember reading that `urdu', meaning 
>`army', was related to the English word `horde' (and now that I think 
>about it, probably to the German word `Heer' as well....)

I think the standard explanation for `horde' and `urdu' is:
borrowed from Turkish `ordu' (army).
On the other hand, German `Heer', Gothic `harjis', Lit. `k~arias'  (army)
looks completely unrelated.
From: eirikur@rhi.hi.is (Eirikur Rognvaldsson)
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Subject: Re: Wanted:'why KILL does not mean CAUSE TO DIE'
Date: 22 Dec 92 10:18:01 GMT
Distribution: sci

In <1h5012EINN3ei@uni-erlangen.de> geissler@jupiter.linguistik.uni-erlangen.de (Stefan Geissler) writes:


>Someone told me about an article (which maybe a couple of years old)
>with the title 'why KILL does not mean CAUSE TO DIE'. 
>That sounds quite interesting for something I have to write right now,
>but I haven't been able to find out where this article was published.

>Any suggestions?
>Thanks a lot.
>--stefan
>---

Jerry A. Fodor: "Three reasons for not deriving `kill' from `cause to die'."
Linguistic Inquiry 1 (1970), 429-438.


>*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
>|        Stefan Geissler  : 09131 / 207987		  |
>|         Raumerstr. 13  8520 Erlangen                    |
>|    e-mail: geissler@linguistik.uni-erlangen.de          |
>|	     sngeissl@faui80.informatik.uni-erlangen.de   |
>|_________________________________________________________|
>|           A robot with lofty inflection                 |
>|          read Stein in the poetry section               |
>|                but read it 'Arose                       |
>|                is arose is arose'                       |
>|        and thought it concerned resurrection.           |
>*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

Eirikur Rognvaldsson
Institute of Linguistics
University of Iceland
eirikur@rhi.hi.is

-- 
Eirikur Rognvaldsson			e-mail:	eirikur@rhi.hi.is
Institute of Linguistics		voice:	+354-1-694403
University of Iceland			fax:	+354-1-694410
IS-101 Reykjavik, ICELAND
From: connolly@memstvx1.memst.edu
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Subject: Re: The Days Of The Week In Latin
Date: 3 Jan 93 21:07:41 -0600
Organization: Memphis State University

In article <memo.831375@cix.compulink.co.uk>, alext@cix.compulink.co.uk (Alex Thomas) writes:
> Did someone explain why 'Wednesday' does not appear in German?
> Isn't it because Wotan was tabooed: compare our English 'touch wood'.

No doubt.
 
> Secondly, did anyone derive 'Samstag/Samedi'? I think it's 'Sabbatum Dies'.
> Judaeo-Christianity has thus 'annexed' only one German day, as opposed to
> two French; while English weekdays have remained stoutly pagan.

_Samstag_ is allegedly derived from Greek _sambaton_, an alternate form of
_sabbaton_, the connection being that there was a Gothic mission to Germany,
the Goths having learned their Arian Christianity from the Greeks and then
sending missionaries up the Danube.  Bavarian dialects of German have
another weekday name with this origin: _Pfinztag_ 'Thursday' derives from
Greek _pente:_ 'fifth'.  And yet another: Bavarian _Ertag_ 'Tuesday' is
named after the Greek god Ares (with a > e through Umlaut); the Latin
equivalent was, of course, _dies Martis_.

While _Pfinztag_ and _Ertag_ are confined to Bavarian, _Samstag_ has
a wider distribution, being used throughout the South and up the Rhine.
(Northern and Eastern areas say _Sonnabend_, and a very few places say
_Saterdag_, a Frisian form.)

Because of this distribution, it is possible that French _Samedi_ is borrowed
(and remade) from _Samstag_, though it could also be derived from some Latin
analogue of _sambaton_.  My Larousse chastely mentions only _dies sabbatum_,
which does not explain the _m_ at all.

--Leo Connolly				Prost Neujahr!
From: koontz@cam.nist.gov (John E. Koontz X5180)
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Subject: Re: English/American
Keywords: English, dialects
Date: 22 Dec 92 16:10:08 GMT
Organization: National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD

|> >>What evidence is there for the theory that British and American English are
|> >>becoming more similar? ...
...
|> >The world media system. For instance the English spoken in the U.S.A would
|> >have split in various sub-languages if it were not for televison and radio 
...

Actually, I believe that at least some studies suggest that American English
dialects are continuing to diverge.  As far as the influence of the broadcast
media, it is generally evident what the geographical origins of all but the
best announcers are.  Announcers do have to shift toward a "standard" usage
(whose nature is not well understood), but they are seldom successful in 
eliminating all traces.  Some eliminate virtually nothing, sportscasters and
weather announcers in particular.  I suspect that the main centripetal force
in American English is not broadcasting, but migration.  Americans, at least
certain classes, move around quite a bit.  

----
John E. Koontz (koontz@bldr.nist.gov)

Disclaimer:  Views and recommendations, express or implied, are my own, and
do not reflect the opinion or policy of my employers.

     People say, `Believe half of what you see,
     Son, and none of what you hear.'
     But I can't help being confused,
     If it's true, please tell me, dear.
From: bierbach@guvax.acc.georgetown.edu
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Subject: Re: Need help with Mongolian (Urdu)READ/NEW/FOLLOWUP
Date: 24 Dec 92 01:56:39 -0500
Distribution: world
Organization: Georgetown University

In article <9954@fs3.cam.nist.gov>, koontz@cam.nist.gov (John E. Koontz X5180) writes:
> In article <1992Dec23.163017.84829@evolving.com>, jww@evolving.com (John W. Woolley) writes:
> `Mogul' is a variant of `Mongol'.  The Moguls considered themselves
> to be heirs of the Mongol royal line.  Conceivably the words `Ordos'
> and `Urdu' are related, too, though I am unable to verify that.  The
> languages, of course, are completely different in affiliation.  I 

 I had always thought that the word `Urdu' was completely 
Indo-European in origin, since I remember reading that `urdu', meaning 
`army', was related to the English word `horde' (and now that I think 
about it, probably to the German word `Heer' as well....)

-- 
Jeremy Bierbach                                          Georgetown University	
                     bierbach@guvax.acc.georgetown.edu
From: eirikur@rhi.hi.is (Eirikur Rognvaldsson)
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Subject: Re: Wanted:'why KILL does not mean CAUSE TO DIE'
Date: 22 Dec 92 10:35:37 GMT
Distribution: sci

The article you are referring to is probably:

Jerry A. Fodor: "Three reasons for not deriving `kill' from `cause to die'.
Linguistic Inquiry 1 (1970), 429-438.

-- 
Eirikur Rognvaldsson			e-mail:	eirikur@rhi.hi.is
Institute of Linguistics		voice:	+354-1-694403
University of Iceland			fax:	+354-1-694410
From: bhattach@quip.eecs.umich.edu (sayan bhattacharyya)
Subject: Re: Need help with Mongolian (Urdu)
Organization: University of Michigan EECS Dept., Ann Arbor, MI
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 15:54:00 GMT

In article <1992Dec30.212324.3001@leland.Stanford.EDU> alderson@elaine46.Stanford.EDU (Rich Alderson) writes:
>In article <Dec.27.22.14.52.1992.1477@pilot.njin.net>, hubey@pilot (Hubey) writes:


>>Mogul is a variant of Mongol but in this case it's one of mistaken
>>identity. Moguls were Turkic not Mongol.
>
>Were they?  I was under the impression that they were Persian.
>
>-- 
>Rich Alderson   

Well, Babur, the founder of the Mughal dynasty, was a Chaghatai Turk.



-- 
Sayan Bhattacharyya          |   Colourless green ideas sleep furiously.
Graduate student             |
Artificial Intelligence Lab  |
The University of Michigan   |
From: iad@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Ivan A Derzhanski)
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Subject: RIP Tash Mahal (Re: Need help with Mongolian (Urdu))
Date: 31 Dec 92 19:43:54 GMT
Organization: Centre for Cognitive Science, Edinburgh, UK

In article <Dec.30.19.20.34.1992.29818@pilot.njin.net> hubey@pilot.njin.net (Hubey) writes:
>Taj Mahal is probably combination of Turco-Farsi
>or Turco-Hindi (taj is probably from tash=(stone)).

It is nothing of the sort.  _ta:j_ is `crown, diadem, wreath' in Arabic
(root _t w j_).  It has been borrowed with the same meaning in Persian.
So much about this one.

-- 
 `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: sci.lang,alt.usag.english
From: BLICK@VM.CC.LATECH.EDU
Subject: Re: Rhetorical question
Organization: Louisiana Tech University
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 92 16:03:57 CST

In article <6819@npri6.npri.com>
eric@npri6.npri.com (Eric Williams) writes:
 
>For instance, asign reads:
>
>        "No smoking section inside."
>
>This can be interpreted as 1) there are multiple seating sections, one
>of which is for non-smokers; 2) no smokers allowed at all.
>The implied result is that non-smokers will always be accommodated.
>I know this is just semantic fuzziness, but I thought it was fun
>enough that someone might have labelled it. Email your thoughts to
>me, as my net-days are numbered (under a dozen).
>
Classifying this kind of statement as "just semantic fuzziness"
tends to dismiss further evidence of a lack of concern on the
part of many people (in this case the writer of the sign) for
clarity in use of the language. It is the kind of thing about
which all of us should be more careful.
 
In this case, insertion of a hyphen to create "no-smoking section
inside" would eliminate confusion and indicate that the place
contains sections for both smokers and non-smokers.
 
Eddie Blick
Journalism Department
Louisiana Tech University
Newsgroups: sci.lang
From: JAREA@UKCC.UKY.EDU
Subject: Tis the season
Organization: University of Kentucky
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 1992 01:35:59 GMT

Rorate celi desuper
Hevins distill your balmy shouris,
For now is rissin the bricht day ster
Fro the ros Mary, flour of flouris;
The cleir sone quhome no clud devouris,
Surmunting Phebus in the est,
Is cummin of his hevinly touris
Et nobis Puer natus est.
 
Archangellis, angellis, and dompnationis,
Tronis, potestatis and marteiris seir,
And all ye hevinly operationis,
Ster, planit, firmament, and speir,
Fyre, erd, air, and watter cleir,
To him give loving, most and lest,
That come in to so meik maneir
Et nobis Puer natus est.
 
Synnaris, be glaid and pennance do
And thank your makar hairtfully,
For he that ye mycht nocht cum to
To yow is cummin full humly;
Your saulis with his blud to by
And lous yow of the feindis arrest,
And only of his awin mercy
Pro nobis Puer natus est.
 
All clergy do to him inclyne
And bow unto that barne benyng,
And do your observance devyne
To him that is of kingis king;
Ensence his altar, reid and sing
In haly kirk, with mynd degest,
Him honouring attour all thing
Qui nobis Puer natus est.
 
Celestiall fowlis in the are
Sing with your nottis upoun hicht,
In firthis and in forrestis fair
Be myrthfull now, at all your mycht;
For passit is your dully nycht,
Aurora hes the cluddis perst,
She son is rissibn with glaidsum lycht,
Et nobis Puer natus est.
 
Now spring up, flouris, fra the rute,
Revert you upwart naturaly,
In hono;ur of the blissit frute
That rais up fro the rose Mary;
Lay out your levis lustely,
Fro deid take lyfe now at the lest
In wirschip of that Prince wirtyhy
Qui nobis Puer natus est
 
Syng hevin imperiall most of hicht,
Regions of air mak armony;
All fishe in flud and foull of flicht
Be myrthfull and mak melo;dy;
All Gloria in escelsis cry,
Hevin, erd, se, man, bird, and best;
He that is crownit abone the sky
Pro nobis Puer natus est.
 
     (Aside:  this has always been one of my three favorite Christmas
      poems, Ivan, and it's the right tongue!  Best wishes to all.  Ho ho.)
 
Newsgroups: sci.lang
From: JAREA@UKCC.UKY.EDU
Subject: Re: Need help with Mongolian (Urdu)
Organization: University of Kentucky
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 01:39:19 GMT

Or is it perpaps not closer to Chugdush?
 
Newsgroups: sci.lang
From: alderson@cisco.com (Rich Alderson)
Subject: Re: Need help with Urdu, too
Originator: alderson@leland.Stanford.EDU
Reply-To: alderson@cisco.com (Rich Alderson)
Organization: Cisco Systems (MIS)
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 92 21:16:17 GMT

In article <ONEIL.92Dec19163322@husc10.harvard.edu>, oneil@husc10 (John O'Neil) writes:
>Hindi and Urdu are closely related, I know, the first being influenced by
>Sanskrit and the latter by Farsi and Arabic.  Hindustani is supposed to be a
>language which is neutral between them, but its linguistic status (rather than
>its political status) is unclear to me.

It was an attempt at a neutral *name* for the language spoken by Hindus and
Moslems, and called variously Hindi and Urdu depending on dialect and writing
system.

It is more a political statement than a linguistic definition.
-- 
Rich Alderson   'I wish life was not so short,' he thought.  'Languages take
                such a time, and so do all the things one wants to know about.'
                                                        --J. R. R. Tolkien,
alderson@leland.stanford.edu                              _The Lost Road_
From: alderson@cisco.com (Rich Alderson)
Subject: Re: "n'ha" == "daughter of" ? Language?
Originator: alderson@leland.Stanford.EDU
Reply-To: alderson@cisco.com (Rich Alderson)
Organization: Cisco Systems (MIS)
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 92 21:20:37 GMT

In article <adamsd.725590369@crash.cts.com>, adamsd@crash (Adams Douglas) writes:
>I'm curious about the middle name "n'ha" in the quote I'm using in my
>signature file. I'm told it means "daughter of" but I can't find it in any
>reference. What language is it? Is there an equivalent for "son of" in the
>same language? Inquiring minds want to know!
>
>=====================================================================
>Adams Douglas   | Always tell the truth, | You can die like the rest,
>adamsd@         | then you make it the   | or be one of the best.
>crash.cts.com   | other bloke's problem! | - Cyndi n'ha June, 1992
>Chula Vista, CA | - Sean Connery, 1971   |


My first guess would be a Celtic language, most likely Scottish Gaelic, this
based on the fact that the elder sister of my friend Conall O Raghallaigh is
Roisin Ni Raghallaigh.

The most obvious choice for "son of" is then "mac."
-- 
Rich Alderson   'I wish life was not so short,' he thought.  'Languages take
                such a time, and so do all the things one wants to know about.'
                                                        --J. R. R. Tolkien,
alderson@leland.stanford.edu                              _The Lost Road_
Newsgroups: sci.lang
From: goer@ellis.uchicago.edu (Richard L. Goerwitz)
Subject: indexed grammars
Reply-To: goer@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 22:58:17 GMT

Anyone happen to know where that proverbial best reference is
that discusses parsers for indexed grammars?  I have a copy of
Gazdar & Mellish, but I don't find the discussion particularly
clear.  One thing that is particularly troublesome about the
book is that although PATR is used throughout, no formal defi-
nition for PATR is ever offered!

-- 

   -Richard L. Goerwitz              goer%midway@uchicago.bitnet
   goer@midway.uchicago.edu          rutgers!oddjob!ellis!goer
Organization: Universit de Sherbrooke
Date: Sunday, 27 Dec 1992 01:16:36 EST
From: <LDAA@UDESVM.BITNET>
Newsgroups: sci.lang
Subject: Re: Wanted:'why KILL does not mean CAUSE TO DIE'
 <1992Dec22.164636.4452@grace.boeing.com>

Anna Wierzbicka, "Why kill does not mean cause to die -the semantics
of action sentences", Foundations of Language, 1975.

-Pierre Blackburn
Newsgroups: sci.lang
From: oprytz@ulrik.uio.no (Otto Prytz)
Subject: Re: "Nominative" absolute?
Organization: University of Oslo
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 12:29:24 GMT


>Subject: Re: "Nominative" absolute?
connolly@memstvx1.memst.edu writes:
>I don't see what you would gain by making the English participle adverbial,
>and the morphology does not suggest it (some of the more adjectival parti-
>ciples form adverbs by adding -ly, e.g. _knowingly_, _comnceitedly_).
Good objection, and I'll try to clarify:
Most absolute clauses may be paraphrased as adverbial clauses. In Latin
the ablative case marked the clause as adverbial. In Spanish, the gerund is
_the adverbial form of the verb_, just as the infinitive is the "noun
form" and the participle (there is only one) the adjective form. In
absolute clauses where a gerund is present, the gerund may be taken as the
head of the clause, marking the adverbial function of the whole clause.
In a similar way, and not only in absolute clauses, the English -ing form
can be the head of an adverbial phrase.

By the way, the use of nominative pronouns in Spanish absolute clauses
is not restricted to clauses with a gerund. In general, the clause consists
of a "predicate part", which comes first, and a "subject part". The former
may well be a participle used passively, or an adjective:
     Vivo yo, estos libros no se vendera'n.
     "Alive I, these books will not be sold." (i.e. as long as I'm alive.)
Newsgroups: sci.lang
From: alderson@cisco.com (Rich Alderson)
Subject: Re: Need help with Mongolian (Urdu)
Originator: alderson@leland.Stanford.EDU
Keywords: SCA, Urdu, Mongolian, Mongol
Reply-To: alderson@cisco.com (Rich Alderson)
Organization: Cisco Systems (MIS)
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 92 21:15:40 GMT

In article <1992Dec19.172133.18284@dcs.qmw.ac.uk>, tariqh@dcs (Tariq Hamid) writes:
>In <1903@niktow.canisius.edu> salley@niktow.canisius.edu (David Salley) writes:
>>1.) Is Urdu the language of the Mongols?
>
>You're 2000 miles wide of the mark, buddy. The Urdu language originates from
>India. Its creation is attributed to the Mughals (also spelt Mogal, and
>pronounced as in the phrase "movie mogal"). It originated from the Deccan
>plain, and is directly based upon the dialect of Indo-European that was spoken
>in the city of Lucknow. Hence the original urdu poets are known as Dakkhani
>(as in Deccan) poets. This dialect was developed under the auspices of the
>mughal emperor Shah Jahan - the king who had the Taj Mahal built for his
>beloved wife.

Your time line is distorted a great deal.  By the time of the Indo-Iranian
invasion of India, the Indo-European language had evolved into a number of
mutually non-intelligible languages, just as, in a similar stretch of time, the
Indic dialects of the first millenium (the Prakrits) have developed into the
modern Indo-Aryan languages, or early Latin has developed into the modern
Romance languages.
-- 
Rich Alderson   'I wish life was not so short,' he thought.  'Languages take
                such a time, and so do all the things one wants to know about.'
                                                        --J. R. R. Tolkien,
alderson@leland.stanford.edu                              _The Lost Road_