HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gtoal@castle.ed.ac.uk (Graham Toal)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Question: Multiply or multiplication ?
Date: 10 Apr 92 22:37:10 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University

In article <1992Apr10.164136.941@alf.uib.no> erikb@eik.ii.uib.no (Erik Boman) writes:
:But in the context of linear algebra, the operation of 
:multiplying matrices is sometimes called 
:  "a matrix multiply"
:instead of
:  "a matrix multiplication".

I think the former is an ellipsis of 'a matrix multiply operation'.

Don't worry about it; your English is so good people will assume
whichever one you chose is correct :-)

Graham
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: jhelm@rucs.faculty.cs.runet.edu (John Helm)
Subject: thumbing one's nose
Organization: Radford University
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 92 15:05:24 GMT


I have heard the expression "thumbing one's nose at"
meaning "showing a lack of respect for " for as long
as remember, but I have never seen anyone perform the
gesture referred to in this expression.
   Is there a place where people actually thumb their
noses to show disrespect?  If so, how is it done, exactly,
and how much disrespect does it show, compared  to
other gestures of disrespect such as sticking out one's
tongue. 
-- 
Best regards,
     John

jhelm@rucs.facultu.cs.runet.edu  {John P. Helm CPSC Dept. Radford University
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: <None>
From: ttullio@eagle.wesleyan.edu
Date: 7 Apr 92 02:29:05 EST
Organization: Wesleyan University

Well, this seems to be the place to request authoritative answers on subtle
matters of triviality, so here goes:

Is there any rhyme or reason to the entymologies of words ending in
-ion and -er?  To clarif: Why is my car's ignition called an ignition,
and not an igniter?  Is it because it is that which causes SOMETHING
else to ignite, or do I have it completely backwards and it's because
it is itself what ignites?

Too much time stuck in traffic makes me wonder these things...


Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: jhelm@rucs.faculty.cs.runet.edu (John Helm)
Subject: Re: P's and q's
Organization: Radford University
Distribution: alt.usage.english
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 92 14:08:55 GMT

In article <1992Apr13.160452.12287@eng.cam.ac.uk> pjh@eng.cam.ac.uk (P.J. Hogben) writes:
>pete@btcase.bt.co.uk (Pete Harris) writes:
>
>>Please could someone enlighten me as to the origin of the phrase ...
>
>>mind one's p's and q's
>
I have read that p's and q's stand for pints and quarts of ale.
Pubs would allow patrons to drink on credit and would mark down
p's and q's as drinks were served. Sometimes mistakes were made,
intentionally or otherwise, hence the admonition to mind one's
p's and q's.

-- 
Best regards,
     John

jhelm@rucs.facultu.cs.runet.edu  {John P. Helm CPSC Dept. Radford University
Xref: sparky alt.usage.english:2958 soc.bi:4392
From: gtoal@castle.ed.ac.uk (Graham Toal)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english,soc.bi
Subject: Out of the closet (was Re: Dictionary of American and British Usage)
Date: 11 Apr 92 17:13:04 GMT
Followup-To: alt.usage.english
Organization: Edinburgh University

In article <x7tjtf+.sue@netcom.com> sue@netcom.com (Sue Miller) writes:
>The US expression "coming out of the closet" means "coming out of a small
>confining space", and is not taken to mean "coming out of a WC".

I got quite a lot of heated mail about this.  I thought that accusations
of homophobia were quite funny considering my own sexuality... 

Maybe I'm wrong, but I'd always assumed (and thought I'd always heard tell)
that 'coming out of the closet' was from the practice of repressed gays
meeting in public toilets - a practice known over here as 'closeting' -
and that when someone 'came out of the closet' they did their chatting-up
in more acceptable places, like everyone else.  Ie they no longer had
to meet in secret in WCs.

Has *anyone* else heard this or have I imagined the whole thing in my
sleep some day?

Graham
PS Followups redirected back to a.u.e; soc.culture.british removed.
From: sasghm@theseus.unx.sas.com (Gary Merrill)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: British usage of 'immediately'
Date: 16 Apr 92 17:51:20 GMT
Organization: SAS Institute Inc.
Originator: sasghm@theseus.unx.sas.com
X-Bytes: 741

The talk about British vs. American usage has reminded me of a
locution that has *always* puzzled me.  I believe that the
sentence:

	We went to the pub immediately the play was finished.

would be found quite unusual by a British speaker.  I, on the
other hand, feel that it is missing something -- such as a
preposition:

	We went to the pub immediately after the play was finished.

I don't believe that I've ever heard an American (this side of
pretension) use the first form.  But I seem to hear it more often
than not from Britons.  Any comments?


-- 
Gary H. Merrill  [Principal Systems Developer, C Compiler Development]
SAS Institute Inc. / SAS Campus Dr. / Cary, NC  27513 / (919) 677-8000
sasghm@unx.sas.com ... !mcnc!sas!sasghm
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Word Dictionary Wrong?!?!?
From: brian@comp.vuw.ac.nz (Brian Boutel)
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 21:45:23 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Comp. Sci., Victoria Uni. of Wellington, New Zealand.


In article <1992Apr6.141015.1@wombat.newcastle.edu.au>, eepjm@wombat.newcastle.edu.au (Peter Moylan) writes:
"
|> 
|> Outside the US, "dependent" is the adjective, and "dependant" is the
|> noun.  A dictionary will tell you this, a spelling checker won't.
|> 

That's a little over-definite, even if it's the preferred usage.
Chambers (UK-based dictionary with strong Scottish influence) has
n. depend'ant (also -ent) ... adj. depend'ent (also -ant)...

Dear old Fowler has
dependant -ent. The noun has -ant, rarely -ent; the adj. -ent, rarely -ant.

--brian


Internet: brian@comp.vuw.ac.nz
Postal: Brian Boutel, Computer Science Dept, Victoria University of Wellington,
        PO Box 600, Wellington, New Zealand
Phone: +64 4 471-5328   Fax: +64 4 495-5232
-- 
Internet: brian@comp.vuw.ac.nz
Postal: Brian Boutel, Computer Science Dept, Victoria University of Wellington,
        PO Box 600, Wellington, New Zealand
Phone: +64 4 471-5328   Fax: +64 4 495-5232
Xref: sparky alt.usage.english:2831 soc.culture.british:5860
From: marcus@sun.pcl.ac.uk (Marcus Harvey)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english,soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Dictionary of American and English Usage (part 01/02)
Date: 7 Apr 92 13:36:52 GMT
Organization: Polytechnic of Central London

In article <jwb.702255223@capek.rdt.monash.edu.au> jwb@capek.rdt.monash.edu.au (Jim Breen) writes:
>smithj@jacobs.CS.ORST.EDU (Jeremy Smith) writes:
>>  The
>>Dictionary
>>    of
>>American and British
>>      Usage
>
>>For English Speaking People
>
>A laudable effort. A few minor corrections:
>>alfalfa n : lucern
>
As in the sprouty things you put in sarnies? We call it alfalfa. Never
heard of "lucerne", sounds like a C&W song...

>More often spelt lucerne.
>
>>buck for v : root for
>
>Tsk, tsk. "Root" in English means either rummage around, or have sexual
>intercourse. The correct translation is "cheer" or "barrack"

Barrack? In Oxbridge maybe. I thought it was a place where soldiers hung
out.
I don't think "cheer" is the same at all. Americans talk about "rooting for
someone" to describe their support for them. I think "backing" as in "I'm
backing Kennedy" would be the closest, but I don't think there's a direct
translation.
>
>>catsup n : tomatoe ketchup
>
>More often tomato sauce. Ketchup sounds US to me.
>
Tomato sauce is what you put on your spaghetti. Ketchup is ketchup.
Perhaps you're older than me or you've got more class?


Marcus Harvey
marcus@uk.ac.pcl.sun - JANET
marcus%sun.pcl.ac.uk@ukacrl - BITNET/EARN

                                                          ...Bubble Up!
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english,soc.culture.british
From: jblake@bingsuns (Jim Blake)
Subject: Re: Dictionary of American and English Usage (part 01/02)
Organization: State University of New York at Binghamton
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 14:52:36 GMT

In article <3239@inca.comlab.ox.ac.uk> rabson@oxford.ac.uk (David Rabson) writes:
>
>Some Oxford guide to English variants asserts with the original poster that
>Americans pronounce "Mary," "merry," and "marry" all the same, but it isn't
>true.  The first two are fairly close, but the third is completely different,
>at least as I and all the other Americans I know pronounce it.
>

I grew up near Binghamton, New York, pronouncing all three the same. 
When I went to college at Cortland (40 miles away) I was mocked by people
from New York City (200 miles away) because they pronounced all three
differently.

During my time at college, I learned to distinguish a variety of dialects, 
and was able to identify residents of Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens, Long 
Island (South Shore), Long Island (North Shore) and NorthEast New Jersey
by their pronounciation.

As someone has already remarked, one should be careful when generalizing
about American pronounciation.

Newsgroups: alt.usage.english,soc.bi
From: jmacvean@willamette.edu (Jennifer Mac vean)
Subject: Re: Out of the closet (was Re: Dictionary of American and British Usage)
Keywords: different definition
Organization: Willamette University, Salem, OR
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1992 22:44:32 GMT

There seems to be some misconception about the meaning of "coming out of
the closet" in American.  Unless I've been repeatedly grossly misinformed,
it is the same as "coming out."  I think it was derived from the idea that
hiding one's sexuality, even from one's self perhaps, is like living in a
closet.  Not a water closet (WC), but a tiny space where you hang your coat.
It's really dark and uncomfortable, and comingt out of it entails admitting
to others that you sexuality is in fact, SURPRISE!!! not strictly hetero-
sexual.  

BTW, on the other thread about abuse of young males:  from what I hear from
therapists, it is less common in males, but it does happen.  I guess that's
because, for abusers, females are the "classic" victims.  Maybe it's because
many of the abusers are male, stuffed with the idea that they are supposed
to dominate.  I don't know.  All kinds of abuse are extremely underreported.
Thus, it's hard to form an idea of how it works.  All I know is that there 
is usually hurt involved when it happens.

Enough seriousness.  *smooch everybody*  <flutter> <flutter> <look away...>

Lynne
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
telnet:  jmacvean@willamette.edu \ I'm not subversive, I just |   ______
snailmail:  900 State Street-G254 \ want to change everything! |  \ /\ /
            Salem, Oregon  97301   |    ;-)                    |   \/\/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
P.S.  When and where is this orgy,  I mean convention, in Seattle?  I want to
come too!!!  I can be a redhead if you like...
From: slagle@lmsc.lockheed.com (Mark Slagle)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Darrens and "Bewitched"
Date: 9 Apr 92 15:30:28 GMT
	<chris.702711118@rufus>
Reply-To: slagle@lmsc.lockheed.com
Organization: Lockheed Missiles and Space Co., Sunnyvale, Ca.
In-reply-to: chris@state.COM.AU's message of 8 Apr 92 05:31:58 GMT

In article <chris.702711118@rufus> chris@state.COM.AU (Chris Keane) writes:
   No, dago (pronounced day-go) is, in a strict interpretation, a spaniard.
   However, it is also often used to descibe wogs and people of other
   Mediterranean countries.

----
Whose strict interpretation of what?  In my experience 'dago'
is used exclusively in reference to those of Italian ancestry.
But given its derivation from the given name 'Diego', I can
concede that it could be applied to Spaniards, Portuguese,
or anyone with any remotely Hispanic features.  I would
expect that it has been hurled at a great number of different
sorts of people.  So far as I know, we have yet to establish
strict standards for the use of ethnic epithets (other than
to reject them categorically in Politically Correct circles).

--
----
Mark E. Slagle                                 PO Box 61059
slagle@lmsc.lockheed.com                       Sunnyvale, CA   94088
408-756-0895                                   USA
From: gtoal@castle.ed.ac.uk (Graham Toal)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: thumbing one's nose
Date: 12 Apr 92 11:43:04 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University

In article <1992Apr9.150524.3367@rucs.faculty.cs.runet.edu> jhelm@rucs.faculty.cs.runet.edu (John Helm) writes:
:
:I have heard the expression "thumbing one's nose at"
:meaning "showing a lack of respect for " for as long
:as remember, but I have never seen anyone perform the
:gesture referred to in this expression.
:   Is there a place where people actually thumb their
:noses to show disrespect?  If so, how is it done, exactly,
:and how much disrespect does it show, compared  to
:other gestures of disrespect such as sticking out one's
:tongue. 

I have a vague recollection that the 'cocking a snoot' gesture is
discussed at length in Desmond Morris's "Manwatching".  I think in
ancient days it was quite an obscene gesture rather than the playful
childrens one it is today.

G
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: anderson@macc.wisc.edu (Jess Anderson)
Subject: Re: More FAQ fodder
Organization: Madison Academic Computing Center, UW-Madison
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 92 23:45:34 GMT


In article <Apr.10.14.15.41.1992.29450@gandalf.rutgers.edu>
rarosenb@gandalf.rutgers.edu (Robert Rosenberg) writes:

>Yo!  Tmesis, synecdoche, and their ilk are rhetorical figures, not
>parts of speech.

Figures of speech, surely; tropes, in brief.  I'm not sure
rhetorical figure is the same thing, for I think that
includes gesture, in addition to the words themselves.

-- 
Jess Anderson <> Madison Academic Computing Center <> University of Wisconsin
Internet: anderson@macc.wisc.edu <-best, UUCP:{}!uwvax!macc.wisc.edu!anderson
NeXTmail w/attachments: anderson@yak.macc.wisc.edu  Bitnet: anderson@wiscmacc
Room 3130 <> 1210 West Dayton Street / Madison WI 53706 <> Phone 608/262-5888
Xref: sparky alt.usage.english:3047 soc.culture.british:6429
From: lpj@col.hp.com (Laura Johnson)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english,soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Dictionary of American and British Usage
Date: 14 Apr 92 20:29:05 GMT
Article-I.D.: col.1992Apr14.202905.26764
Organization: HP Colorado Springs Division

gtoal@castle.ed.ac.uk (Graham Toal) writes:
> or clothes closet, I was trying to use a different word assuming that
> closet had some different meaning for you, and I inferred that it was
> a toilet from the US expression 'coming out of the closet' where it
> clearly means a WC.

Not so clear to me ... I thought the metaphor was, you're hiding in
the closet (with the clothes), then you come out. I don't see what 
toilets have to do with it.

> 
> Looks like we both mean the same thing by it then.

I think you're right.
> 
> Graham

-LJ.
-- 
lpj@hpctdls.col.hp.com
Opinions expressed are my own, but may be licensed for a nominal fee.
From: goyal@mansci1.uwaterloo.ca (sameer goyal)
Subject: strunk & white on "hopefully"
Originator: goyal@mansci1.UWaterloo.ca
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 13:43:17 GMT


reproduced shamelessly from strunk & white, the elements of style, 3rd
ed

this once used adverb meaning "with hope" has been distorted and is now
widely used to mean "i hope" or "it is to be hoped". such use is not
merely wrong, it is silly. to say, "hopefully i'll leave on the noon
plane" is to talk nonsense. do you mean you'll leave on the noon plane
in a hopeful state of mind? or do you mean you hope you'll leave on the
noon plane? whichever you mean, you haven't said it clearly. although
the word in its new, free-floating capacity may be pleasurable and even
useful to many, it offends the ear of many others, who do not like to
see words dulled or eroded, particularly when the erosion leads to
ambiguity, softness, or nonsense.
-- 
sameer goyal
goyal@mansci1.uwaterloo.ca
From: gtoal@robobar.co.uk (Graham Toal)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Definition of prefix wanted
Date: 7 Apr 92 22:50:29 GMT
Organization: Robobar Ltd., Perivale, Middx., ENGLAND.

In article <1992Apr3.202425.15853@ugle.unit.no> omk@Lise.Unit.NO (Ole Martin Kristensen) writes:
:My original posting may not have appeared quite as it should according to
:Netiquette (what a thoroughly American word!) - you see, all my Smileys were 
:in the wash.
: I repeat my question: any suggestions?

Is this the int-ended response?

G
-- 
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: userisra@mts.ucs.ualberta.ca (Mark Israel)
Subject: Re: "Get used to it."
Originator: lnds@zeus.biochem.ualberta.ca
Organization: University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 15:04:03 GMT

In article <204603@unix.cis.pitt.edu>, dtate@unix.cis.pitt.edu (David M Tate) writes:

> [...] maybe I didn't quite understand what you meant by "prescriptive".

   A "prescriptive" grammarian is one who makes recommendations, as 
opposed to a "descriptive" grammarian, who merely tries to record what
is going on.

> [...] if you suggest that there is no correct *usage* of those all-too-
> common English nouns, then I think you must be mistaken.  [...] usage 
> is about how you use them, not whether you use them at all.  At least, 
> that's what they always told me was the subject of questions about 
> usage.  [...] if common usage :-) in this newsgroup is different, I'll 
> go by that.

   Yes, we do in this newsgroup consider certain individual words to be 
undesirable usage, irregardless :-) of context.

> What teachers and editors enforce are the prescriptions of the 
> prescriptivists.  The only people I know who *enforce* laws are police 
> officers and jurists, but that doesn't absolve the legislature of all 
> responsibility.

   Bogus analogy.  Police and jurists don't choose which set of laws to
enforce.  Teachers and editors *do* choose which textbooks and stylebooks
to use.

> Questions of usage, as opposed to questions of manners.

   Suppose you have no personal distaste for "hopefully", but avoid it in
order not to offend some of your readers?  Prescriptive questions of
usage *are* questions of manners.

> "Consensus aesthetics" is an oxymoron.

   Don't forget the "oxy-" part of "oxymoron" -- POINTEDLY foolish.

   If the majority of a certain body of people like or dislike the same
thing, that's consensus aesthetics.

> I don't confuse not liking it with thinking it's bad for the language.

   Do you like things that you *do* think are bad for the language?

> I wouldn't like to lose all those loverly, quirky irregular verbs we 
> have, either, but it would (probably) be good for the language.

   Language serves many purposes, including poetry.  I doubt Esperanto
poetry is as good as English poetry.

> This is not a suggestion; this is a First Amendment question.

   I'm not subject to the U.S. constitution. :-)

> If you're only making suggestions, and I'm only concerned with usage 
> (and not style), then perhaps we can take off our gloves and part 
> amicably.

   Certainly!  Just retract your "Noble efforts? Please." and "Get used
to it." statements and we can do just that.

> But I doubt that you would *prescribe* behaviour for those Normans...

   Wow!  A British spelling.

userisra@mts.ucs.ualberta.ca		Mark Israel
Instinctive grammatical moralizer.
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: goyal@mansci1.uwaterloo.ca (sameer goyal)
Subject: how are webster's new world and collegiate dictionaries different?
Originator: goyal@mansci1.UWaterloo.ca
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 13:47:22 GMT


.. and what about their numerous pocket dictionaries?
is it all marketing?
-- 
sameer goyal
goyal@mansci1.uwaterloo.ca
From: rarosenb@gandalf.rutgers.edu (Robert Rosenberg)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: tmeses (was Re: A whole nother story)
Date: 9 Apr 92 04:51:41 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

Tmeses are not valid, in a careful sense, but they are fun.  "Ah, so
loverly sittin' absobloominlutely still," for one better-known
example.  Check W. E. Espy's _Garden of Eloquence_ for more fun with
rhetorical figures (it can be found remaindered if you've been good).
From: gtoal@castle.ed.ac.uk (Graham Toal)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: P's and q's
Date: 15 Apr 92 22:13:07 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University

In article <1992Apr14.172026.17110@cns.umist.ac.uk> jw@cns.umist.ac.uk (Jon Wells) writes:
:>   And here's one I just thought of:  a corruption of "Mind your 'please's
:>and 'Thank you's."
:
:Congratulations - the latter of these 'ideas' is, in fact, the correct one...
:
:Jon

Excellent.  And could you give us the reference of the earliest
publication citing this usage please?

Graham
Xref: sparky alt.usage.english:2999 soc.culture.british:6198
From: mac@abacus.concordia.ca ( JOHN MCKAY )
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english,soc.culture.british
Subject: Ass (U.S.)
Date: 13 Apr 92 02:40:25 GMT
Followup-To: alt.usage.english
Organization: Cicma, Concordia University, Montreal, Quebec
Originator: mac@abacus


Did Americans ever distinguish between "ass" and "arse" ?

-- 
Thought for the day: Odd order groups are even.
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: dabachma@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu (Donald A Bachman)
Subject: Re: Question: Multiply or multiplication ?
Organization: Engineering Computer Network, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 22:51:38 GMT

charlie@umnstat.stat.umn.edu (Charles Geyer) writes:

>In article <1992Apr10.164136.941@alf.uib.no> erikb@eik.ii.uib.no (Erik Boman)
>writes:

>> I have a question to English speaking persons with some knowledge
>> of mathematics. I am writing my graduate thesis in English
>> (that's a foreign language to me), and I am somewhat confused about the
>> usage of the words "multiply" and "multiplication".
>> Normally, "multiply" is a verb and "multiplication" is a noun.
>> But in the context of linear algebra, the operation of 
>> multiplying matrices is sometimes called 
>>   "a matrix multiply"
>> instead of
>>   "a matrix multiplication".

>I have never heard that usage except in talk about computer programming.
>IMHO it is not English but cute hacker talk which follows the principle
>that all verbs can be nouned and vice versa.

	Whoa! While I'll agree that the first usage is non-standard, the quip
about "cute hacker talk" was most assuredly uncalled for. It is statements
like this, that make mathematicians seem pompous, weird, and generally
unstable. As a computer science major who has completed enough hours in
math to qualify for a degree, I have no desire to see people working
in either field made the target of petty statements.
	BTW, how is new terminology invented, if not through unconventional
usage of existing terms? I suppose that professional jargon also is not English.

Donald Bachman
donald@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu
dabachma@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu

>-- 
>Charles Geyer
>School of Statistics
>University of Minnesota
>charlie@umnstat.stat.umn.edu
-- 




Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: gtoal@castle.ed.ac.uk (Graham Toal)
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english,soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Dictionary of American and British Usage
Date: 10 Apr 92 22:02:15 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University

In article <1992Apr10.172711.2316@col.hp.com> lpj@col.hp.com (Laura Johnson) writes:
:gtoal@robobar.co.uk (Graham Toal) writes:
:> >closet,
:> Toilet rather than clothes cupboard. Also used in 'coming out of the ...'
:
:Nobody caught this yet?? As far as I know 'closet' NEVER means toilet
:or bathroom in the U.S. It's the little room where the clothes are. Not
:a cupboard, because that would be an add-on cabinet kind of thing, rather
:than a little room. (Actually 'clothes cupboard' doesn't parse too well
:in USAn.)

I wouldn't say that normally either, but since the word here is closet
or clothes closet, I was trying to use a different word assuming that
closet had some different meaning for you, and I inferred that it was
a toilet from the US expression 'coming out of the closet' where it
clearly means a WC.

Looks like we both mean the same thing by it then.

Graham
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english