HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jch@rdg.dec.com (John Haxby)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: What ~did~ Don Quixote sit on?
Date: 20 Aug 92 08:05:06 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation

In article <1992Aug19.101251.12497@eua.ericsson.se>, euaneg@eua.ericsson.se (Nils-Erik.Gustafsson) writes:
|> 
|> Any Cervantes scholars out there? Did Quixote
|> start his journey on a donkey before upgrading 
|> to Rosinante, or did the horse break down?

Don Quixote started on Rocinante and, as far as I know,
finished on him.  It may be that Sancho Panza started
on a donlkey whose name was not Dapple, but one could
argue that Cervantes complaints about printers and poor
transcription (in the 2nd part) could argue that Sancho
always rode Dapple.

-- 
John Haxby, Definitively Wrong.
Digital				<jch@rdg.dec.com>
Reading, England		<...!uknet!wessex!jch>

----------------------------------------------------------------
The opinions expressed herein are my own, not my employers.
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: mcoffin@IASTATE.EDU (Marie Coffin)
Subject: Re: Use of 'I' and 'me'
Reply-To: mcoffin@IASTATE.EDU (Marie Coffin)
Organization: Iowa State University
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 19:02:52 GMT

In article <1992Aug17.060928.28044@Princeton.EDU>, roger@phoenix.Princeton.EDU
(Roger Lustig) writes:
>                              [...deleted...]
> Yes and no.  "you-and-I" has been an immutable (i.e., non-declinable)
> piece of English for about 7 centuries.  Especially when preceded by the
> word "between," it's found everywhere.  (As in Shakespeare, _Merchant of
> Venice_, Act III, Sc. 1: "All debts are cleered betweene you and I.")
> 
> But of course we usually say "me" when the pronoun comes after the verb,
> in other situations.  Besides, "me" is used for direct and indirect
> objects, so, analogous to Latin and other heavily
> inflected languages, we would use it in "He called me."  
> 
> So an English teacher would say that "He called you and me" is correct.
> But the glue that holds "you-and-I" together is very strong, and this
> has led to "you-and-I" being common in colloquial speech.  
> 
> Roger
> >ADVthanxANCE.
> >     __  __      __   _  Email the Mabster at: s913606@yallara.cs.rmit.OZ.AU
> >.___/  |/  |____/  |_|
|____________________________________________________.
> >|  / /| /| | __/_| |_| |____  "That's one small step for man, and ---      
|
> >| / / |/ | | \  _| |_| |_  /   SHIT! There's a f**king alien!"             
|
> >`/ /     | |/ /\ | | | | /            -Neil Armstrong (Before govt
coverup).|
>
>(_/------|___/--\__|-|__/---------------------------------------------------'
> 
> 

Hmmm.  I've noticed over the years that the very people who say "between
you and I" are also the ones who never read Shakespeare.  My own impression
is that, here in the US, many children learn to speak saying "me and you"
and "me and him" in the subjects of sentences.  ("Me and you can play
together.")
To correct this, English teachers hammer home the "you and I" message, and the
kids get the idea that "you and I" is the *only* correct form, even
for the object of the sentence.   

I'm waiting for a linguist to jump into the fray and point out that, when
children learn to speak, "me" is always used long before "I".  But maybe
someone already did, and me just missed that.  

Marie Coffin
 
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: maj@waikato.ac.nz
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english,soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Name for Brits and Irish?
Date: 16 Aug 92 17:42:26 +1200
Distribution: eunet
Organization: University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand

In article <1992Aug15.185424.12447@Princeton.EDU>, kjcarey@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Kevin J. Carey) writes:
> In article <3795@keele.keele.ac.uk> cla04@seq1.keele.ac.uk (A.T. Fear) writes:
>>
>>Since all of the island of Ireland is part of Britain, I think British
>>still works. However if you don't like it the late John Biggs-Davidson proposed a union between UK
>>and Eire with the proposed name of IONA (Isles Of the North Atlantic) so
>>I suppose Ionians might work - don't any one tell the Greek government
>>though as if current policies are anything to go by they'd sulk like
>>mad.
>>
>>Andy
> 
> This has to be deliberate provocation. Since I have nothing better to
> do, I will allow myself to be provoked.
> 1. Ireland is not part of Britain.
> 2. Eire is an Irish word, and this newsgroup is generally conducted in
> English.
> 3. Even allowing mistake 2 to pass, your use of Eire is incorrect. Eire
> is the Irish for Ireland, so the UK and "Eire" are not distinct
> entities.
> 4. You must be someone who either reads this newsgroup a lot, or never
> reads it at all.
> ---- Kevin.
There is a sense in which Ireland may be taken
as part of Britain. In common geographic
nomenclature the largest island in the Whatever
Islands is commonly called

Great Whatever      or     Big Whatever.

The second largest is often referred to as

   Little Whatever.
	
If you applied that rule Ireland would be
'Little Britain'.  Probably that's pushing things
too far, but Ireland should still be British in
the geographic sense. The problem is that the
word 'British' acquired too many other emotion-
laden meanings.
-- 
Murray A. Jorgensen [ maj@waikato.ac.nz ]    University of Waikato
Department of Mathematics and Statistics     Hamilton, New Zealand      
__________________________________________________________________
'Tis the song of the Jubjub! the proof is complete,
if only I've stated it thrice.'
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: cochran@spam.rtp.dg.com (A. Jing Hippy)
Subject: Re: Quote or simile for "success"?
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 92 12:25:45 GMT
Organization: A Suffusion of Yellow

In article <1992Aug12.202328.3991@igor.tamri.com>, viviana@igor.tamri.com (Vivian Aldridge) writes:
|> 
|> Hello everyone,
|> 
|> I'm having trouble writing the closing remarks to a speech
|> I'm giving at work next Thursday. I'd like this speech to
|> end with a bang, but somehow it falls short.
|> 
|> This is my last paragraph:
|> 
|> 	In closing this is a wonderful group, a group of
|> 	caring, fun loving, intelligent, and determined
|> 	people who are willing to get things done. 
|> 	They give meaning to the word "success."
|> 
|> Yawn-"they give meaning to the word "success."
|> 
|> I need a quote or maybe a simile. I haven't found one that
|> fits however. Can you help?

Wasn't it Oscar Wilde who said "It is not enough to succeed. Others must
fail."  No, I guess that wouldn't fit in with the rest of the paragraph.

Frank Moore Colby said "I have found some of the best reasons I ever had
for remaining at the bottom simply by looking at the men at the top."
Hmmmm...  That really doesn't make it either.  

I'll look in my "Dictionary of Quotations and Proverbs" tonight and see if
there are any "success" entries.  Thank heaven for concordances.

+--------------------------------------------------+
|Dave Cochran, Data General Corporation, RTP, NC   |
|cochran@dg-rtp.dg.com                             |
+--------------------------------------------------+
|The meaning of the complement form of a switch    |
|can be determined by complementing the meaning    |
|of the switch.                                    |
|                     --Ada Reference Manual       |
+--------------------------------------------------+
From: pflynn@ccvax.ucd.ie (Peter Flynn, Official Muffin-sampler)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Acronym server (updated)
Date: 20 Aug 92 01:04:43 GMT
Organization: University College Dublin

The FreeText Acronym Server
---------------------------

This is a pilot repository of acronyms held at University College, Cork,
Ireland. You can mail one-line submissions to FREETEXT@IRUCCVAX.UCC.IE
(or FREETEXT@IRUCCVAX if you are on BITNET/EARN/NETNORTH/etc).

All text after the first line of your mail is ignored, so please restrain
yourself from writing more than one line at the moment. There are three things 
you can do with this server right now:

o  If your line of text says     HELP     then you get this message back.

o  If your line of text contains only one word, it is treated as a search
   request for that word, and the acronym database will be searched and any 
   matches will be mailed back to you. EG sending the word   EUROPE    will
   return any definition containing that word.

o  If your line of text contains more than one word, it is assumed to be
   a submission for adding to the database. The format must be:

      first word:  the acronym, in uppercase, please
      second and subsequent word:  the definition in mixed case, please

   single space between words, no tabs or control characters. Punctuate
   only when it is an integral part of the definition or acronym. No
   quotation marks. Start at the left margin, don't indent anything.
   Use capitals in the defintion to represent the letters of the acronym.
   Use markup like TeX or something similar for accented letters, to avoid
   having non-ASCII characters mangled by the RFC822 networks.
   Examples:

BITNET Because-It's-There NETwork   
SGML Standard Generalised Markup Language
RARE R\'eseaux Associ\'es pour la Recherche Europ\'eenne

Any queries, suggestions, etc to me, Peter Flynn <cbts8001@iruccvax.ucc.ie>
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: lio@ornl.gov (MILLION D L)
Subject: Re: "Route"
Organization: Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 20:20:26 GMT

In article <1992Aug14.185302.3065@news.columbia.edu> gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) writes:
>
>Well, I don't know much about carpentry tools, vut when you install one of
>those nifty gateways in the computer center called "an internet router" or
>you print postal barcodes with Carrier-Route numbers on them, it's "root"
>and "rooter" and not "rowt" and "rowter"
>
>
>--
>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

Maybe at Columbia University, but here we have an extensive network, and
I've never heard anyone call one of those gizmos anything but "rowter".
"Rooter" sounds like a pig looking for truffles.

Dan Million                        Internet:  milliondl@ornl.gov
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener)
Subject: Re: Can I axe you a question?
Reply-To: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 02:44:22 GMT

In article <1992Aug21.205645.7083@Princeton.EDU> roger@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Roger Lustig) writes:
>
>>Wow.  Chaucerian spelling was found among the best speakers and writers for
>>centuries too.
>
>Oh, stop it, Gabe.  You know perfectly well that spelling is
>standardized in english in a way that usage is not.  Moreover,
>Chaucerian spelling was never wrong in any sense, when it was used.

The Chaucer bit was in response to your line regarding the acceptability
of ungrammatical English because it was used before the relevant rules
came into being.  

>It was in, of all things, Theodore Bernstein's _The Careful Writer_.
>He, like most others, makes a distinction similar to yours; but then he
>notes: "Whereas it is fine to write, 'The Liberals won three fewer seats
>than in the previous election,' you run into idiom trouble if you reduce
>the number to one; you cannot say "one fewer seats," nor can you say
>'one fewer seat.'  The only escape hatch is 'one seat fewer.'"

Many people would say "The liberals won one fewer seat."

>Got that?  You CANNOT say... 

Well, since you found it in a book, I'll be sure to strike it from my
vocabulary right away.

>seat" for just that reason, or "one less set of footsteps at my door,"
>in a song that would not be improved by replacing all the "one less"es
>with "one fewer."

Most lyricists I know are not the most grammatical people...

>>I did.  Sounds fine.  Though I would say "No fewer than 10 applicants
>>called."  I wouldn't say "No less than 10 applicants called."
>
>But a vast number of English speakers would, and do.  And always have.
>You got a problem with that?

Nope.  The vast number can say whatever it likes.

>Perhaps you should read one or two, Gabe.  Especially the Chicago Manual
>you cited yesterday, which doesn't correct *any* grammatical or usage
>errors.

I've read one or two (or three), along with formatting manuals like Chicago
and MLA.  And yes, Chicago's getting in there was an oversight, as I was
going to reply to something you had written about academic writing, made
a list involving Chicago and MLA, and ultimately decided not to include it.
Unfortunatly I did a less than ideal job of purging it from the message.
So, lest you jump up and down about the Chicago Manual again...


--
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
From: dant@techbook.com (Dan Tilque)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: The OED (was Re: Less versus Fewer: Victory at NPR!
Date: 20 Aug 92 11:03:02 GMT
Organization: Pseudopolis Yard

goer@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>
>Incidentally, the OED is not strictly a prescriptive dictionary (as
>I myself have been repeatedly reminded here), although there is an
>obvious tendency to cite only the "best" sources (!).

All dictionaries are both prescriptive and descriptive at the same time.
The just vary in their inclination.  The OED tends towards the
prescriptive side, but not nearly as much as the AHD, for example.

As far as its sources go, the first edition tended to use citations
from famous authors like Shakespeare, Milton, and Spencer.  The
Supplements and words added in the second edition often have recent and 
non-literary sources like popular magazines (even science fiction
magazines).  I wouldn't be surprised if they quoted a comic book.  (In
fact, if the word "offensitivity" makes it, they'll probably quote
Bloom County, since that's where it was coined.)

To an extent they were forced to do this, since they try to find the
earliest use of a word for the first citation.  You won't find "e-mail"
or "wysiwyg", both of which are in the second edition, in Shakespeare.

---
Dan Tilque    --     dant@techbook.com

"To be or to be NOT!"  --  the 90's version of Shakespeare
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: peter.churchill@rose.com (peter churchill)
Subject: Re: Plural Porrige
Organization: Rose Media Inc, Toronto, Ontario.
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 22:29:03 GMT
X-Gated-By: Usenet <==> RoseMail Gateway (v1.70)


Date Entered: 08-17-92 17:16

dx009@cck.coventry.ac.uk (the Crisco Kid) inquires:
| 
| In article <1992Aug13.143919.49489@ccvax.ucd.ie> pflynn@ccvax.ucd.ie (Peter Flynn, Official Muffin-sampler) writes:
| >In article <36788@sdcc12.ucsd.edu>, jclark@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (John Clark) writes:
| >> +Is that "less" or "fewer"?  Somehow, I think you meant the latter.  :)
| >Wonderful. I was taught to try out "less" or "fewer" by testing the phrase
| >against the noun "soup" or "porridge": you can have less soup, but you
| >certainly can't have fewer soup, although you might try fewer soups.
| >Pedanticism is a lovesome thing, God wot.
. . .
| But I digress; perhaps "porridge" is/was plural, and thus there 
| could
| be "fewer porridge".  Care to check? it's either a rara avis or a wild
| goose...

As a result of chasing wild geese, I came up with the following 
foolish discourse on a distastful subject upon which I was forced to 
dine too much in my youth:

" porrige. Altered 16th cent.), partly under influence of dial. 
_porray_, leek-broth, etc., from _poddish, pottage_ (q.v.). Cf. dial. 
_imperence, orra, moral; and fo0r converse change, _eddish, paddock_. 
_Porray_ is OF. _poree_, Late L. _porrata_, from _porrum_, leek. 
Association of _porrige_ with oatmeal is Sc., in which _parritch_ is 
often treated as plural.
                            - Weekley: An Etymological Dict.

Regards: *PC* <peter.churchill@rose.com>

                  --Ask and ye shall be unfortunate enough to receive.
 
---
   RoseReader 1.70 P001013
   RoseMail 2.00 : RoseNet<=>Usenet Gateway : Rose Media 416-733-2285
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Out of Place
From: thayes@desire.wright.edu
Date: 13 Aug 92 12:12:35 EST
Organization: Wright State University 



In article <1992Aug13.070205.6253@rose.com>, 
greg.grainger@rose.com (greg grainger) writes:
> 
> S(>Anyone know if there is a word that means something that is in the wrong
> S(>place or is out of place, like anachronism is for time. Like a fireplace
> S(>in a house in a climate in which you would clearly never light a fire.
> 
> 'incongrous?'
> 
> It's not exactly what you're looking for, but hope it helps anyway . . .

How about "tourist?"  I can't help but remember all those lectures I received
in my more callow youth about things "not sprouting legs and running
away" ...

-----ted hayes
From: jhill@gallstone.bucknell.edu (HILL, S JACKSON)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Use of y'all
Keywords: y'all
Date: 18 Aug 92 16:43:00 GMT
Organization: Bucknell University, Lewisburg, PA, USA
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.4-b1

I support codification of "y'all" as the offician second person plural in
English.   Let's do it!  It would bring to full circle the old thou-ye
dichotomy that was so useful awhile back.    Time was when we used to 
justify the formal use of y'all by the following conjugation:

I walk
you walk
he/she/it walks
w'all walk
y'all walk
th'all walk

Makes sense to me.
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: pundette, puntron
From: thayes@desire.wright.edu
Date: 13 Aug 92 11:54:57 EST
 <1992Aug10.112029.8144@vax.oxford.ac.uk> <1992Aug12.100007.3388@desire.wright.edu> <1992Aug13.012835.27045@athena.mit.edu>
Organization: Wright State University 

In article <1992Aug13.012835.27045@athena.mit.edu>, 
dks@athena.mit.edu (dks) writes:
> In article <1992Aug12.100007.3388@desire.wright.edu>,
> thayes@desire.wright.edu writes:
>>Besides, as I opined earlier, "waitron" has that automaton-like look that
>>so aptly describes the duties of the job.
> 
> Contemptuous or not, the "automaton" remark is inappropriate because
> waiting on real, live human beings is very difficult to automate.

My justification for "waitron" was not based on contempt but rather on 
sympathy.  I find myself being more sympathetic when I dine out with friends
who tote along their 2 year olds -- I tip excessively out of gratitude for
*any* service in those situations.

And (!) you have supported my thesis directly: "waiting on real, live human
beings" *IS* so demanding that most glide through it in automaton-like
trances.  Thus, it's a fine description.  But Dennis's "waitri" also
intrigues.

PS: "Get your kicks/On Route 66" -- sing that in any of its incarnation and
listen to how it sounds...

( ObSmly )

-----ted hayes
 
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english,sci.lang
From: goer@ellis.uchicago.edu (Richard L. Goerwitz)
Subject: Re: Can I axe you a question?
Followup-To: alt.usage.english
Reply-To: goer@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 22:14:45 GMT

asimov@wk223.nas.nasa.gov (Daniel A. Asimov) writes:
>
>And I often hear "et cetera" pronounced "ek cetera."  (This is 
>mucus to my ears.)

Foreign phrases always get mangled when borrowed.  It's just a mat-
ter of degree.  We don't pronounce "et cetera" in a particularly
Latin-like manner (even late Latin, I might add).  Nor do the lib-
erated souls who pronounce it "ek cetera."

-- 

   -Richard L. Goerwitz              goer%midway@uchicago.bitnet
   goer@midway.uchicago.edu          rutgers!oddjob!ellis!goer
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener)
Subject: Re: "Route"
Reply-To: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992 03:58:38 GMT

In article <SLAGLE.92Aug13120752@sgi417.msd.lmsc.lockheed.com> slagle@lmsc.lockheed.com writes:
>> [This post is dedicated to the memory of John Cage.]
>
>Do you suppose he's stubled onto the ultimate expression
>of minimalism?  At least he won't be throwing tacks into
>the piano anymore.

More to the point, it's just an extended-length performance of 4'33".


--
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,sci.lang
From: alderson@elaine46.Stanford.EDU (Rich Alderson)
Subject: Re: Can I axe you a question?
Followup-To: alt.usage.english
Originator: alderson@leland.Stanford.EDU
Reply-To: alderson@elaine46.Stanford.EDU (Rich Alderson)
Organization: Stanford University Academic Information Resources
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 92 01:35:31 GMT

In article <1992Aug16.203635.3839@news.columbia.edu>, gmw1@cunixa (Gabe M Wiener) writes:
>Can anyone shed some light on how the dreadful usage of the word "axe" in
>place of "ask" ever got started?  Is there any linguistin explanation as
>to why the s and k sounds get reversed in many inner-city dialects?

The process is called metathesis.  It is a living process in human phonology;
it is as well a historical fact in many languages.

It is also not restricted to "many inner-city" dialects.  There were quite a
few people in my 4th and 5th grade class in Sulphur Springs, Texas, (back in
1960-1962) with exactly the same metathesis.  Further, I have seen representa-
tions of this same metathesis in London speech of the late 19th century.

There aren't many examples of /sk#/ in English, while /ks#/ is very common.
Thus, the metathesis produces a more common sequence, and is therefore more
acceptable to the ears of the listeners.  Thus, it stays on as a lexical item.
-- 
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: alt.usage.english
From: pel@resntl.bhp.com.au (Paul Osborn)
Subject: Re: English English versus *American* English
Organization: BHP Research - Newcastle Laboratories
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 02:17:32 GMT

In article <baron.11.713459553@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> baron@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Dennis Baron) writes:
>From: baron@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Dennis Baron)
>Subject: Re: English English versus *American* English
>Date: Mon, 10 Aug 1992 15:12:33 GMT

>On newspapers and spelling reform, the _Chicago Tribune_ was active
>in spelling reform -- specifically, it pushed simplified spelling--
>from the 1870s to I think it was 1975.  It was also completely 
>ineffective in its campaign, and signalled its abandonment of the
>good fight with a headline that read, "Thru is through and so is tho."

	In Australia, several years ago, we had a would-be politician who 
changed his name to Ivor F and stood on a platform of spelling reform. He 
had about as much success as the Chicago Tribune and copped nearly as much 
flack (flames) as Mandir.
-------- PAUL R OSBORN, Research Scientist, Sensing Technology --- /\/\ --
                BHP Research - Newcastle Laboratories, Australia  / / /\
Snail   :       P.O. Box 188, Wallsend, NSW 2287                 / / /  \
Tel     :       +61 49 51-0605  Fax : +61 49 50-2126            / / / /\ \
Telex   :       AA 28768                                        \ \/ / / /
Internet:       pel@resntl.bhp.com.au                            \  / / /
----------------------------------------------------------------- \/\/\/ -
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english,sci.lang