Interesting article from the AUE's first day:
|
|
Thread rating:  |
DE781 - 14 Jan 2004 21:54 GMT "The centre/center question is a good example of why this is difficult. "Center" is a phonetically correct spelling throughout much of North America, but in Australia (and I think also in England), the spelling "centre" is a better representation of the pronunciation.
Spelling reform is possible, and some influential people are pushing for it; but it is going to mean a much larger separation between the written forms of American English and British English.
Spelling reform has worked in other languages because of the existence of a dominant group which was able to enforce its own pronunciation as the "standard". In the case of modern English, there are two dominant groups, neither of which would be willing to accept the spelling or pronunciation of the other. (Meanwhile, those of us in the non-dominant groups will, as usual, be crushed in the middle.)"
Why can't the Brits change their spelling to accomodate *our* pronunciation, being that it's the *correct* English pronunciation and we also have a majority of English-speakers. Plus, foreigners learn to speak "American"; not Irish.
DE781 - 14 Jan 2004 22:05 GMT "Before Webster (and his predecessors like Benjamin Franklin), `center' and `color' were merely variant spellings. I'm not sure which Dr. Johnson preferred."
Who's "Dr. Johnson"?
Ross Howard - 14 Jan 2004 22:05 GMT >"Before Webster (and his predecessors like >Benjamin Franklin), `center' and `color' were merely variant >spellings. I'm not sure which Dr. Johnson preferred." > >Who's "Dr. Johnson"? The guy who invented Pledge.
-- Ross Howard
Simon R. Hughes - 14 Jan 2004 22:27 GMT >>"Before Webster (and his predecessors like >>Benjamin Franklin), `center' and `color' were merely variant [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > The guy who invented Pledge. That was his brother, Mr Johnson.
 Signature Simon R. Hughes
R H Draney - 14 Jan 2004 23:30 GMT Simon R. Hughes filted:
>>>"Before Webster (and his predecessors like >>>Benjamin Franklin), `center' and `color' were merely variant [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >That was his brother, Mr Johnson. Now a "Johnson doctor" on the other hand, that'd be a urologist....r
DE781 - 15 Jan 2004 01:28 GMT Draney:
>Now a "Johnson doctor" on the other hand, that'd be a urologist....r *That*, I got! I like your yoo-mur.
Robert Lieblich - 15 Jan 2004 02:06 GMT > Simon R. Hughes filted: > > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Now a "Johnson doctor" on the other hand, that'd be a urologist....r I see Joey has attained Bun Mui status -- a feeder of straight lines.
He'll probably ask what I mean.
 Signature Bob Lieblich Comments?
DE781 - 15 Jan 2004 02:17 GMT Liebs:
>> Now a "Johnson doctor" on the other hand, that'd be a urologist....r > >I see Joey has attained Bun Mui status -- a feeder of straight >lines. > >He'll probably ask what I mean. Yes, I do want to know what this "straight line" thing means. You're not the first person who's mentioned it to me. And what's it got to do with Bun? AND, why the f.ck are read messages not staying read? Tres annoying.
Skitt - 15 Jan 2004 02:40 GMT > Liebs:
>>> Now a "Johnson doctor" on the other hand, that'd be a urologist....r >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > do with Bun? AND, why the f.ck are read messages not staying read? > Tres annoying. Clue: a straight man delivers straight lines.
The read message thing is AOL's screw-up. It'll pass, as all things do.
 Signature Skitt (in Hayward, California) www.geocities.com/opus731/
DE781 - 15 Jan 2004 03:01 GMT Skitt:
>Clue: a straight man delivers straight lines. I still don't understand.
Anyways, Truly Donovan, who's still with us, posted this debacle about the subjunctive tense:
"Or are you complaining that it is abused, because I don't find that it is any more or less abused than any other language construct -- some people say things right and some people don't. The person who says "Both him and her was arrested" isn't going to use the subjunctive to suit me, either.
Okay, it is less abused than using the possessive with a gerund, but we can count ourselves on the fingers of one hand anyway."
I get it all up to the last paragraph. What's the "possessive with a gerund" form? And what does she mean about being able to "count ourselves on the fingers of one hand"? Truly is one of only five people who use some kind of possessive with a gerund error? And how does that make it a major abuse, if only five people use it? I'm *clearly* not understanding something.
Skitt - 15 Jan 2004 03:11 GMT > Skitt:
>> Clue: a straight man delivers straight lines. > > I still don't understand. Look up "straight man" in MWCD10.
 Signature Skitt (in Hayward, California) www.geocities.com/opus731/
DE781 - 16 Jan 2004 20:14 GMT Skitt:
>>> Clue: a straight man delivers straight lines. >> >> I still don't understand. > >Look up "straight man" in MWCD10. OK, fine, I did! But how the f.ck was I supposed to know you can all of a sudden look up two words at once and have the dick give the definition? That's whacked! And I *still* don't get why Bun is a straight man. Isn't she a straight woman, or a straight chinkette or something?
Tony Cooper - 15 Jan 2004 04:55 GMT >Skitt: > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >Anyways, Truly Donovan, who's still with us, posted this debacle about the >subjunctive tense: Yes, she's still with us. The news of her passing has been greatly exaggerated.
DE781 - 16 Jan 2004 20:15 GMT Cooper:
>>Anyways, Truly Donovan, who's still with us, posted this debacle about the >>subjunctive tense: > >Yes, she's still with us. The news of her passing has been greatly >exaggerated. Damn!
Mike Bandy - 15 Jan 2004 23:09 GMT ...
>What's the "possessive with a gerund" ...
From www.google.com, put "possessive with a gerund" (with the quotes) in the search box and hit the "I Feel Lucky" button.
 Signature Mike Bandy Glad to help
DE781 - 16 Jan 2004 20:20 GMT Bandy:
>>What's the "possessive with a gerund" > >... > >From www.google.com, put "possessive with a gerund" (with the quotes) >in the search box and hit the "I Feel Lucky" button. Thanks very much, Mike. It was appreciated to see some *real* info here, rather than just diss after diss. I was getting a little fed up. Your post almost single-handedly restored *most* of my confidence in this group.
Still, unfortunately, now I can't even remember *why* I was asking about the "possessive with gerund" rule (a rule I was never officially taught, but am pretty sure I've come to follow most of the time in formal writing); I don't remember if someone corrected something I had written with that rule or if it was from a post from '91. Either way, if the rule isn't really mandatory, what's the big deal about it?
Mike Bandy - 17 Jan 2004 05:04 GMT >what's the big deal about it? LOL. I can't answer that one.
 Signature Mike Bandy
DE781 - 15 Jan 2004 02:24 GMT Liebs:
Wait a minute. Is *that* a diss? The last time I put "comments?" at the end of one of my posts, you accused me of being Bun. *She* stole that from *me*!
Sara Lorimer - 15 Jan 2004 18:49 GMT > I see Joey has attained Bun Mui status -- a feeder of straight > lines. For those AUErs who also read AFU: don't you want to introduce Joey to Jami JoAnne and see what happens?
 Signature SML
ess el five six zero at columbia dot edu <http://pirate-women.com>
DE781 - 15 Jan 2004 22:23 GMT SNL:
>For those AUErs who also read AFU: don't you want to introduce Joey to >Jami JoAnne and see what happens? Who is she? Wpuld I like her? Is AFU "alt.french.usage"? I don't speak French.
Christopher Johnson - 16 Jan 2004 02:04 GMT
> SNL: > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Who is she? Wpuld I like her? Is AFU "alt.french.usage"? I don't speak > French. Joey, AFU is not alt.french.usage and I think some people here on AUE are maybe taunting you a bit by referring only to "AFU" and by avoiding referring to that newsgroup using its full name. AFU does exist though, for sure. Just go to Google, click on 'Groups', and then type in "AFU". You'll find it.
 Signature Christopher
(Change 3032 to 3232 to reply by private e-mail)
DE781 - 16 Jan 2004 20:42 GMT CJ:
>Just go to Google, click on >'Groups', and then type in "AFU". You'll find it. Thanks, CJ! At least I can depend on you to tell it like it is. You're much cooler than than the old prunes here. Do you think we should invite some of our friends here to make this place funner? I've been thinking about doing that. It's so boring here now!
Evan Kirshenbaum - 16 Jan 2004 21:01 GMT > CJ: > > >Just go to Google, click on > >'Groups', and then type in "AFU". You'll find it. > > Thanks, CJ! At least I can depend on you to tell it like it is. So when he tells you to use Google, he's helpful, but when we do...
 Signature Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |I value writers such as Fiske. 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |They serve as valuable object Palo Alto, CA 94304 |lessons by showing that the most |punctilious compliance with the kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com |rules of usage has so little to do (650)857-7572 |with either writing or thinking |well. http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ | --Richard Hershberger
DE781 - 17 Jan 2004 17:14 GMT Evan:
>> CJ: >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >So when he tells you to use Google, he's helpful, but when we do... He says it in a spiritual way! It's all about the spirit! I felt the spirit!
Mike Bandy - 17 Jan 2004 05:15 GMT ...
>Joey, AFU is not alt.french.usage and I think some people here >on AUE are maybe taunting you a bit by referring only to "AFU" >and by avoiding referring to that newsgroup using its full name. >AFU does exist though, for sure. Just go to Google, click on >'Groups', and then type in "AFU". You'll find it. I didn't know you could do that. Anyway, AFU is alt.folklore.urban. If you're interested in folklore, the best websites are http://www.urbanlegends.com/ and http://www.snopes.com/.
 Signature Mike Bandy
DE781 - 17 Jan 2004 17:10 GMT Bandy:
>>Joey, AFU is not alt.french.usage and I think some people here >>on AUE are maybe taunting you a bit by referring only to "AFU" [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >If you're interested in folklore, the best websites are >http://www.urbanlegends.com/ and http://www.snopes.com/. Thanks. But I still think AFU should be "alt.french.usage". Snopes is a cool site. It's where I find out about all those phoney comp virus warnings.
Mike Bandy - 15 Jan 2004 23:03 GMT >> I see Joey has attained Bun Mui status -- a feeder of straight >> lines. > >For those AUErs who also read AFU: don't you want to introduce Joey to >Jami JoAnne and see what happens? For a month or two, I've occasionally lurked on AFU; and I feel right at home. It's amazing how many AUEers post to that group.
 Signature Mike Bandy
Michael Nitabach - 16 Jan 2004 03:53 GMT >> I see Joey has attained Bun Mui status -- a feeder of straight >> lines. > > For those AUErs who also read AFU: don't you want to introduce > Joey to Jami JoAnne and see what happens? That's funny! Maybe they'll save the Bettas together.
-- Mike Nitabach
DE781 - 16 Jan 2004 20:04 GMT Nitabach:
>> For those AUErs who also read AFU: don't you want to introduce >> Joey to Jami JoAnne and see what happens? > >That's funny! Maybe they'll save the Bettas together. What? And someone ANSWER ME: who is this bitch and what is "AFU"? "Alt.f.ck.U."?
DE781 - 15 Jan 2004 01:27 GMT Ross:
>>"Before Webster (and his predecessors like >>Benjamin Franklin), `center' and `color' were merely variant [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >The guy who invented Pledge. I don't understand.
Ross Howard - 15 Jan 2004 01:28 GMT >Ross: > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >I don't understand. I know.
-- Ross Howard
Ross Howard - 15 Jan 2004 01:31 GMT >>Ross: >> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > >I know. Oops. I missed out this bit: http://www.scjbrands.com/docs/menu/scj_home.htm
-- Ross Howard
DE781 - 15 Jan 2004 02:19 GMT Ross:
>>>I don't understand. >> >>I know. > >Oops. I missed out this bit: >http://www.scjbrands.com/docs/menu/scj_home.htm OK, thanks. I get it now. I think I know that company as "Johnson & Johnson".
Pat Durkin - 15 Jan 2004 03:21 GMT > Ross: > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > OK, thanks. I get it now. I think I know that company as "Johnson & Johnson". Think again & again. Or _look_ that company up. Or _read_ the site posted by Ross.
Of course, by this time, you have read the identification of _the_ Dr. Johnson.
Evan Kirshenbaum - 15 Jan 2004 03:34 GMT > Ross: > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > OK, thanks. I get it now. I think I know that company as "Johnson > & Johnson". I doubt it. Johnson & Johnson was founded in 1886 in New Brunswick, NJ, by Robert Wood Johnson and Edward Mead Johnson (and James Wood) to make surgical dressings. S.C. Johnson was also founded in 1886, but by Samuel Curtis Johnson, in Racine, WI, to make parquet floors. I don't believe that any of these Johnsons were doctors.
 Signature Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |Your claim might have more 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |credibility if you hadn't mispelled Palo Alto, CA 94304 |"inteligent"
kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com (650)857-7572
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/
DE781 - 16 Jan 2004 20:06 GMT Evan:
>> OK, thanks. I get it now. I think I know that company as "Johnson >> & Johnson". > >I doubt it. Johnson & Johnson was founded in 1886 in New Brunswick, >NJ, by Robert Wood Johnson and Edward Mead Johnson (and James Wood) to >make surgical dressings. No!! I can't believe you don't know what "Johnson & Johnson" is! They make like baby powder and stuff! Is SC Johnson different than Johnson & Johnson?
And HTF does any of this involve the guy who wrote dictionaries? Plus, he's NOT the ONLY DOCTOR JOHNSON! So there!
Evan Kirshenbaum - 16 Jan 2004 20:16 GMT > Evan: > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > No!! I can't believe you don't know what "Johnson & Johnson" is! Your lack of credulity serves you well in this case.
> They make like baby powder and stuff! Right. That's the company that was founded to make surgical dressings for hospitals using a less expensive process than Lister's. Occasionally, over the course of 118 years, a company branches out into other products.
> Is SC Johnson different than Johnson & Johnson? I believe that that's what I said.
> And HTF does any of this involve the guy who wrote dictionaries? It doesn't. It was a joke that made the apparently erroneous assumption that you have a passing familiarity with 20th-century American culture and would recognize the connection between "Johnson" and "Pledge", a common household product product manufactured by S.C. Johnson. Personally, I'm betting that CJ got it.
You were the one who dragged Johnson & Johnson into it.
 Signature Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |Of course, over the first 10^-10 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |seconds and 10^-30 cubic Palo Alto, CA 94304 |centimeters it averages out to |zero, but when you look in kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com |detail.... (650)857-7572 | Philip Morrison
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/
Skitt - 16 Jan 2004 20:56 GMT >> Evan:
>>>> OK, thanks. I get it now. I think I know that company as >>>> "Johnson & Johnson". [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > You were the one who dragged Johnson & Johnson into it. CJ has been trying to bring YJ up to his level. I hope he succeeds.
 Signature Skitt (in Hayward, California) www.geocities.com/opus731/
DE781 - 17 Jan 2004 17:39 GMT Skitt:
>> You were the one who dragged Johnson & Johnson into it. > >CJ has been trying to bring YJ up to his level. I hope he succeeds. What are you talking about? You people make NO sense! I'm gonna go watch Michael Jackson. It's comforting to know at least *some* people out there are normal!
GEO - 16 Jan 2004 23:47 GMT >It doesn't. It was a joke that made the apparently erroneous >assumption that you have a passing familiarity with 20th-century >American culture and would recognize the connection between "Johnson" >and "Pledge", a common household product product manufactured by >S.C. Johnson. Personally, I'm betting that CJ got it. Is knowing about corporation names an important part of American culture?
Geo
Skitt - 17 Jan 2004 00:19 GMT >> It doesn't. It was a joke that made the apparently erroneous >> assumption that you have a passing familiarity with 20th-century [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Is knowing about corporation names an important part of American > culture? Naah -- it's only about keeping one's eyes and ears open, having some basic intelligence, and being aware of the general goings-on in one's surroundings.
 Signature Skitt (in Hayward, California) www.geocities.com/opus731/
Pat Durkin - 17 Jan 2004 00:22 GMT > >It doesn't. It was a joke that made the apparently erroneous > >assumption that you have a passing familiarity with 20th-century [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Is knowing about corporation names an important part of American > culture? Sad, but true. References to historical figures, and biblical and classical allusions do nothing but confuse many of our youth, while the TV generation has little trouble recognizing metaphorical references to (the more recent) TV commercials and jingles.
Evan Kirshenbaum - 17 Jan 2004 01:06 GMT > > >It doesn't. It was a joke that made the apparently erroneous > > >assumption that you have a passing familiarity with 20th-century [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > the TV generation has little trouble recognizing metaphorical > references to (the more recent) TV commercials and jingles. This is, of course, completely different from all other times and places, in which the bulk of the people were more familiar with historical figures and biblical and classical allusions than they were with well-known popular figures of the day and the items found in their houses and towns.
I'll grant that it's only in the last 150 years or so that brand names became a pervasive part of the everyday world, but I suspect that you will find a similar familiarity (and expectation of familiarity) with brand names in pretty much every culture that has them.
 Signature Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |The mystery of government is not how 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |Washington works, but how to make it Palo Alto, CA 94304 |stop. | P.J. O'Rourke kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com (650)857-7572
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/
Pat Durkin - 17 Jan 2004 04:37 GMT > > > >It doesn't. It was a joke that made the apparently erroneous > > > >assumption that you have a passing familiarity with 20th-century [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > will find a similar familiarity (and expectation of familiarity) with > brand names in pretty much every culture that has them. Snarl, snort, and for heaven's sake, Evan! I might expect that kind of response from Joey. (Wow, won't this make him feel great?)
Donna Richoux - 17 Jan 2004 11:21 GMT > > > > >It doesn't. It was a joke that made the apparently erroneous > > > > >assumption that you have a passing familiarity with 20th-century [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > Snarl, snort, and for heaven's sake, Evan! I might expect that kind of > response from Joey. (Wow, won't this make him feel great?) You mean Joey has been sarcastic this whole solid time?
You gotta remember -- in California, people often say the opposite of what they mean. Unlike, say, the British.
And then they'll switch to being as sincere as Wisconsinites. They don't send out any signals.
 Signature Best -- Donna Richoux A Californian living abroad
Pat Durkin - 17 Jan 2004 19:57 GMT > > > > > >It doesn't. It was a joke that made the apparently erroneous > > > > > >assumption that you have a passing familiarity with 20th-century [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > You mean Joey has been sarcastic this whole solid time? Joey can snip all previous entries in any thread excepting, and then take a completely opposite tack to his prior postings in the thread, thereby claiming both sides of the road. He can laugh up his sleeve at all of us, asserting his superior intelligence and our "xenophobiphilia".
> You gotta remember -- in California, people often say the opposite of > what they mean. Unlike, say, the British. > > And then they'll switch to being as sincere as Wisconsinites. They don't > send out any signals. Believe me, I understood the sarcasm.
I felt that, like you, Evan was putting me in my place for expressing a truism. Thank you so much.
There are times when we have other compulsions than reflexive posting.
Mike Barnes - 17 Jan 2004 11:49 GMT In alt.usage.english, Evan Kirshenbaum wrote:
>> Sad, but true. References to historical figures, and biblical and >> classical allusions do nothing but confuse many of our youth, while [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >will find a similar familiarity (and expectation of familiarity) with >brand names in pretty much every culture that has them. Of course - in any society in which people didn't become aware of brand names, brand owners would stop wasting their money (OK, *our* money). The significant point - which you seem to treat very lightly - is the modern pervasion of brand names.
 Signature Mike Barnes Cheshire, England
GEO - 17 Jan 2004 15:34 GMT >>>Evan Kirshenbaum wrote: >>> Sad, but true. References to historical figures, and biblical and >>> classical allusions do nothing but confuse many of our youth, while >>> the TV generation has little trouble recognizing metaphorical >>> references to (the more recent) TV commercials and jingles.
>>This is, of course, completely different from all other times and >>places, in which the bulk of the people were more familiar with >>historical figures and biblical and classical allusions than they were >>with well-known popular figures of the day and the items found in >>their houses and towns.
>Of course - in any society in which people didn't become aware of brand >names, brand owners would stop wasting their money (OK, *our* money). >The significant point - which you seem to treat very lightly - is the >modern pervasion of brand names. Thank you for the answers. I guess the comment arose my curiosity as to what would be considered essential knowledge in American culture (maybe in many other countries as well). Once upon a time -on certain social circles- it would have been considered essential for an educated person to be have learnt Latin and Greek, and be familiar with Greek and Roman Mythology. Now it seems that actors, singers, athletes, and corporations form part of everybody's culture. How much knowledge of this topics would be expected? I would agree that these corporations have become so ubiquitous around the world that we can not but be aware of them. Their names and brands are part of our vocabularies. But asides from knowing their names, How much should we know about these corporations? As Pat said, if this culture is not local; How does it develop? Well, this are not exactly language topics, so I will go off and ponder this questions elsewhere.
Thanks. Geo
Evan Kirshenbaum - 17 Jan 2004 20:25 GMT > Of course - in any society in which people didn't become aware of brand > names, brand owners would stop wasting their money (OK, *our* money). > The significant point - which you seem to treat very lightly - is the > modern pervasion of brand names. Before we go much further, please define "modern". Many of the pervasive brand names of today are more than 100 years old (some considerably more), and I suspect that there were a large number that would have been instantly recognizable to children and adults 50, 75, or 100 years ago. (Plus, of course, all the brand names that would have been familiar to them, but not us.)
I was collecting old brand names for a while, and found about 250 current ones that are over 100 years old and about 120 that are over 150 years old (and an additional 125 that are between 75 and 100). The oldest current brand names I've been able to dig up referring to something like their current business are Guinness and Wedgwood, both dating to 1759. (Lloyd's is older, but it was a coffee shop in 1688 and a publication in 1734, and didn't start doing insurance until 1871.) The oldest brand name we have in our house seems to be Baker's chocolate, which dates back to 1780, just beating out Schweppes (1783). These wouldn't have been household names back then, of course, but I suspect that they would have been by the late nineteenth century, when brand names started to proliferate.
 Signature Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |There are two types of people - 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |those who are one of the two types Palo Alto, CA 94304 |of people, and those who are not. | Leigh Blue Caldwell kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com (650)857-7572
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/
Simon R. Hughes - 17 Jan 2004 20:53 GMT >> Of course - in any society in which people didn't become aware of brand >> names, brand owners would stop wasting their money (OK, *our* money). [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > course, but I suspect that they would have been by the late nineteenth > century, when brand names started to proliferate. Seems to me someone needs to define "brand". Just sticking the name of the family business over the door of the shop or on the product packaging doesn't necessarily seem to qualify, to me. We need a marketing strategy, a campaign to get consumers to identify a certain product with a certain name, a claim of superiority over other producers -- that kind of thing. Then we'll have a brand.
 Signature Simon R. Hughes On topic, and non-anti-American.
Mike Barnes - 18 Jan 2004 20:17 GMT In alt.usage.english, Evan Kirshenbaum wrote:
>> Of course - in any society in which people didn't become aware of brand >> names, brand owners would stop wasting their money (OK, *our* money). >> The significant point - which you seem to treat very lightly - is the >> modern pervasion of brand names. > >Before we go much further, please define "modern". Pat referred to "the TV generation", and my "modern" was intended to indicate approximately the same period. But the actual period wasn't central to my point.
>Many of the >pervasive brand names of today are more than 100 years old (some >considerably more), and I suspect that there were a large number that >would have been instantly recognizable to children and adults 50, 75, >or 100 years ago. (Plus, of course, all the brand names that would >have been familiar to them, but not us.) Yes, but were they pervasive more than 100 years ago? Were *any* brand names pervasive (by modern standards) at that time?
>I was collecting old brand names for a while, and found about 250 >current ones that are over 100 years old and about 120 that are over [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >course, but I suspect that they would have been by the late nineteenth >century, when brand names started to proliferate. I'd draw a distinction between brand names proliferating and them becoming pervasive.
 Signature Mike Barnes Cheshire, England
Evan Kirshenbaum - 17 Jan 2004 00:45 GMT > >It doesn't. It was a joke that made the apparently erroneous > >assumption that you have a passing familiarity with 20th-century [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Is knowing about corporation names an important part of American > culture? Not important, per se, but you sort of expect people to be familiar with brand names of things they have around the house and see advertised. I might not expect people to *know* that Pledge was made by S.C. Johnson (and, indeed, I wasn't sure myself that it was), but I'd expect them to be familiar enough with both names to make the connection.
There are some corporate names that aren't widely advertised. I wouldn't, for example, expect most people to know Kimberly-Clark, even though they know their most popular brand, Kleenex. But this was more like somebody replying to a mention of a "gamble" by saying that it was more like a "Procter".
 Signature Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |Code should be designed to make it 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |easy to get it right, not to work Palo Alto, CA 94304 |if you get it right.
kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com (650)857-7572
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/
DE781 - 17 Jan 2004 17:43 GMT Evan:
>But this was more >like somebody replying to a mention of a "gamble" by saying that it >was more like a "Procter". But that's just SOOOO gay! I think 1/2 the reason why I can't understand youse jokes is that I wouldn't think *anyone*, even an AUEer, could be so flamboyantly GAY! If that's you's idear of yoo-mur, you needs to take my 2 cents and buy a new sense of yoo-mahh!
R J Valentine - 17 Jan 2004 05:18 GMT } On 16 Jan 2004 12:16:17 -0800, Evan Kirshenbaum } <kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com> wrote: } }>It doesn't. It was a joke that made the apparently erroneous }>assumption that you have a passing familiarity with 20th-century }>American culture and would recognize the connection between "Johnson" }>and "Pledge", a common household product product manufactured by }>S.C. Johnson. Personally, I'm betting that CJ got it. } } Is knowing about corporation names an important part of American } culture?
You can bet your BP it is.
 Signature R. J. Valentine <mailto:arjay@wicked.smart.net> Lately "Beyond Petroleum"
DE781 - 17 Jan 2004 17:38 GMT Evan:
>It doesn't. It was a joke that made the apparently erroneous >assumption that you have a passing familiarity with 20th-century >American culture and would recognize the connection between "Johnson" >and "Pledge", a common household product product manufactured by >S.C. Johnson. Personally, I'm betting that CJ got it. I'm still horribly confused. *I* didn't bring up Pledge!
Tony Cooper - 15 Jan 2004 04:56 GMT >Ross: > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >OK, thanks. I get it now. I think I know that company as "Johnson & Johnson". You're trying to stem the flow of blood with a band-aid. With the amount of blood flowing, you'll need a mop.
DE781 - 16 Jan 2004 20:06 GMT Cooper:
>>OK, thanks. I get it now. I think I know that company as "Johnson & >Johnson". > >You're trying to stem the flow of blood with a band-aid. With the >amount of blood flowing, you'll need a mop. What are you on about now?
DE781 - 15 Jan 2004 02:18 GMT Howard:
>>>>Who's "Dr. Johnson"? >>> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >I know. A little *help* please; isn't the guy who invented Pledge "Mr. CLEAN"?
Simon R. Hughes - 15 Jan 2004 07:34 GMT > Howard: > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > A little *help* please; isn't the guy who invented Pledge "Mr. CLEAN"? Robert Nixon invented Pledge?
 Signature Simon R. Hughes
Laura F Spira - 15 Jan 2004 08:04 GMT >>Howard: >> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Robert Nixon invented Pledge? Richard, shirley.
 Signature Laura (emulate St. George for email)
Simon R. Hughes - 15 Jan 2004 08:35 GMT >>>Howard: >>> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Richard, shirley. He was RF's namesake.
 Signature Simon R. Hughes
Richard Maurer - 15 Jan 2004 08:56 GMT << [DE781] A little *help* please; isn't the guy who invented Pledge "Mr. CLEAN"? [end quote] >>
<< [Simon R. Hughes] Robert Nixon invented Pledge? [end quote] >>
<< [Laura F Spira] Richard, shirley. [end quote] >>
Richard shirley was part of the team that reinvented the pledge.
-- --------------------------------------------- Richard Maurer To reply, remove half Sunnyvale, California of a homonym of a synonym for also. ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Harvey Van Sickle - 15 Jan 2004 09:09 GMT On 15 Jan 2004, Richard Maurer wrote
><< [DE781] > A little *help* please; isn't the guy who invented Pledge "Mr. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Richard shirley was part of the team that reinvented the pledge. Any relation to Shirley Jones?
 Signature Cheers, Harvey
Ottawa/Toronto/Edmonton for 30 years; Southern England for the past 21 years. (for e-mail, change harvey to whhvs)
Spehro Pefhany - 15 Jan 2004 14:51 GMT >On 15 Jan 2004, Richard Maurer wrote > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > >Any relation to Shirley Jones? Tree-ripened waxed pears.
Best regards, Spehro Pefhany
 Signature "it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward" speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com
John Dean - 15 Jan 2004 17:30 GMT >>> Howard: >>> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Richard, shirley. Do you know Google can't find a single well-known Richard Shirley to enable me to make some stunning jokes? -- John Dean Oxford De-frag to reply
Laura F Spira - 15 Jan 2004 17:46 GMT >>>>Howard: >>>> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > Do you know Google can't find a single well-known Richard Shirley to enable > me to make some stunning jokes? Sometimes Google can let you down. I've wasted a lot of time today playing with the new Google feature which is being tested which lets you read extracts of books. It's taken me some time to work out exactly what to type in - the snippet in the Guardian that led me to this was a bit misleading. The formula appears to be
[your search word or phrase] site:print.google.com
If, for example, you wanted a taste of Henning Mankell, my current favourite crime writer, you would type in
mankell site:print.google.com
Some of the links only provide the cover blurb, with others you seem to get as much as a whole chapter.
I'm not quite sure how useful this feature is, though.
 Signature Laura (emulate St. George for email)
DE781 - 15 Jan 2004 22:28 GMT Laura:
>Sometimes Google can let you down. I've wasted a lot of time today >playing with the new Google feature which is being tested which lets you >read extracts of books. "Amazon.com", maybe? It's great. I don't even buy text books anymore. I just Amazon them!
Laura F Spira - 16 Jan 2004 08:04 GMT > Laura: > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > "Amazon.com", maybe? It's great. I don't even buy text books anymore. I just > Amazon them! How should one respond to this post? Possible alternatives: 1. Ironically: "*What* a good idea!" "Why doesn't that surprise me?" "That explains a lot."
2. Seriously, with explanations of: * the importance of reading in learning * the role of text books in learning * the economics of text book publishing from the author's perspective
If DE781 is typical of US college students, I am thankful that I teach in the UK higher education system, for all its shortcomings. A student who has spent the last semester on an exchange in Florida came to see me yesterday. She is a bright but not outstanding student. After a lengthy account of all the differences between her experience at Brookes and that in Florida, she sighed deeply and said "It's going to be quite difficult to get back to *proper* reading and thinking now."
 Signature Laura (emulate St. George for email)
Charles Riggs - 16 Jan 2004 08:14 GMT >If DE781 is typical of US college students, I am thankful that I teach >in the UK higher education system, for all its shortcomings. I'm quite sure you realise he is anything but typical. If he were typical, most of the Americans in this group would make statements similar to his.
 Signature Charles Riggs Email address: chriggs¦at¦eircom¦dot¦net
Laura F Spira - 16 Jan 2004 09:06 GMT >>If DE781 is typical of US college students, I am thankful that I teach >>in the UK higher education system, for all its shortcomings. > > I'm quite sure you realise he is anything but typical. If he were > typical, most of the Americans in this group would make statements > similar to his. Most of the Americans posting here appear to be somewhat older than DE781. It is not impossible that they were like that at that age.
 Signature Laura (emulate St. George for email)
Michael Nitabach - 16 Jan 2004 14:17 GMT >>>If DE781 is typical of US college students, I am thankful that I >>>teach in the UK higher education system, for all its [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > than DE781. It is not impossible that they were like that at that > age. Agreed. But it is not even remotely likely.
-- Mike Nitabach
John O'Flaherty - 16 Jan 2004 16:00 GMT >>>If DE781 is typical of US college students, I am thankful that I teach >>>in the UK higher education system, for all its shortcomings. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >Most of the Americans posting here appear to be somewhat older than >DE781. It is not impossible that they were like that at that age. The same applies to most of the non-American posters. A few of them may have been below grade level when they were sophomores, too.
-- john
John Holmes - 17 Jan 2004 10:59 GMT > The same applies to most of the non-American posters. A few of them > may have been below grade level when they were sophomores, too. Very few, if any, of the non-American posters would ever have been sophomores. But I know what you mean.
-- Regards John
DE781 - 16 Jan 2004 20:36 GMT Laura:
>Most of the Americans posting here appear to be somewhat older than >DE781. It is not impossible that they were like that at that age. Well, at least we weren't kissing a bitch's moth-bally a.s at my age.
DE781 - 16 Jan 2004 20:34 GMT Riggs:
>I'm quite sure you realise he is anything but typical. If he were >typical, most of the Americans in this group would make statements >similar to his. And most *do*, because I da bomb diggity!
Lars Eighner - 16 Jan 2004 08:45 GMT > If DE781 is typical of US college students, I am thankful that I teach > in the UK higher education system, for all its shortcomings. A student [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > that in Florida, she sighed deeply and said "It's going to be quite > difficult to get back to *proper* reading and thinking now." The following is typical of the quality of the inquiries I get every semester. This is from a university student who, to judge from his or her name, is a native speaker of English. This student had sufficient initiative to write to me and knows he or she is in trouble. I suppose there are many more who do not have so much initiative or insight.
>>> Dear Mr. Eighner: >>> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >>> truth I am struggling within Professor *********'s class, and any >>> advise you would permit me would be a tremendous help.
 Signature Lars Eighner -finger for geek code- eighner@io.com http://www.io.com/~eighner/ "Writers, you know, are the beggars of Western society." --Octavio Paz
DE781 - 16 Jan 2004 20:38 GMT >>>> Dear Mr. Eighner: >>>> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >>>> truth I am struggling within Professor *********'s class, and any >>>> advise you would permit me would be a tremendous help. Oy vey! Jesus Christ! Ay caramba! Madonna mia! And every other racial slur! Oh well, the poor girl is probably just not very bright. Maybe I can tutor her? Steinar Mala sure liked my help, eh, ho?
Evan Kirshenbaum - 16 Jan 2004 21:02 GMT > >>>> Dear Mr. Eighner: > >>>> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > racial slur! Oh well, the poor girl is probably just not very > bright. Maybe I can tutor her? Out of curiousity, what makes you think that the author is female?
 Signature Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |When all else fails, give the 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |customer what they ask for. This Palo Alto, CA 94304 |is strong medicine and rarely needs |to be repeated. kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com (650)857-7572
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/
DE781 - 17 Jan 2004 17:15 GMT Evan:
>Out of curiousity, what makes you think that the author is female? Because the writing sounds feminine.
Sara Lorimer - 16 Jan 2004 13:56 GMT > If DE781 is typical of US college students, I am thankful that I teach > in the UK higher education system, for all its shortcomings. It's been five years since I last took a class at an American college. No, he's not typical. Did you really think he was?
(As an aside: sigh. I vote for putting "Just how uncultured and stoopid are Americans, anyway?" in the FAQ and quit discussing it here.)
 Signature SML
ess el five six zero at columbia dot edu <http://pirate-women.com>
R J Valentine - 17 Jan 2004 05:26 GMT } (As an aside: sigh. I vote for putting "Just how uncultured and stoopid } are Americans, anyway?" in the FAQ and quit discussing it here.)
I can't wait to see the answer. Is that going to be in there, too?
} -- } SML } } ess el five six zero at columbia dot edu <http://pirate-women.com>
 Signature R. J. Valentine <mailto:arrr@wicked.smart.net>
Charles Riggs - 17 Jan 2004 05:49 GMT >> If DE781 is typical of US college students, I am thankful that I teach >> in the UK higher education system, for all its shortcomings. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >(As an aside: sigh. I vote for putting "Just how uncultured and stoopid >are Americans, anyway?" in the FAQ and quit discussing it here.) Good idea, Sara. It could open an avenue for the likes of Simon Hughes to post on topics of greater universal interest.
As another aside, I don't think Laura thinks Americans are, in general, stupid. Stupid as a few of us are, DE781 remains an anomaly. It might even be correct to say he's unique, in his level of ignorance, among the college and high school students I've known. Perhaps American students have been suffering from a considerably dumbed-down educational system compared with my day, but I rather doubt it.
 Signature Charles Riggs Email address: chriggs¦at¦eircom¦dot¦net
Tony Cooper - 17 Jan 2004 06:32 GMT >>> If DE781 is typical of US college students, I am thankful that I teach >>> in the UK higher education system, for all its shortcomings. [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >dumbed-down educational system compared with my day, but I rather >doubt it. He's not stupid. He's got half of aue looking up definitions for him and he tells them that "That's not good enough. Explain it better". He's just lazy and manipulative.
I don't think he's particularly bright, but he's of average intelligence. He probably memorizes well enough to get decent grades, comprehends at an average level, but lacks the ability to extrapolate or the initiative to examine.
R J Valentine - 17 Jan 2004 07:27 GMT ... } He's not stupid. He's got half of aue looking up definitions for him } and he tells them that "That's not good enough. Explain it better". } He's just lazy and manipulative.
You say that like it's a bad thing.
} I don't think he's particularly bright, but he's of average } intelligence. He probably memorizes well enough to get decent } grades, comprehends at an average level, but lacks the ability to } extrapolate or the initiative to examine.
I suspect he's brighter than you peg him. He's just been skating so long that he's only just recently getting his walking legs. Pound for pound, he has shown more improvement per year than a lot of people. He'll never know as much as *some* people, whom you might guess; but how much improvement have *they* shown year after year.
Oddly enough, you're probably just what he needs to get him with the program.
 Signature R. J. Valentine <mailto:arjay@wicked.smart.net>
Dena Jo - 17 Jan 2004 16:13 GMT > On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 06:32:02 GMT Tony Cooper > <tony_cooper213@mungedyahoo.com> wrote: ... [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > I suspect he's brighter than you peg him. He's just been skating > so long that he's only just recently getting his walking legs. I supect he does it on purpose. It's part of his AUE act.
 Signature Dena Jo
Delete "delete.this.for.email" for email.
DE781 - 17 Jan 2004 17:01 GMT Dena Jo:
>> I suspect he's brighter than you peg him. He's just been skating >> so long that he's only just recently getting his walking legs. > >I supect he does it on purpose. It's part of his AUE act. *Someone* deserves an award! I don't know who though.
Pat Durkin - 17 Jan 2004 21:35 GMT > Dena Jo: > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > *Someone* deserves an award! I don't know who though. LOL!
Joey, stay out of this. It is the nominating committee for an award, and you are the prime candidate. It's supposed to be a _secret_.
Tony Cooper - 17 Jan 2004 17:07 GMT >> On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 06:32:02 GMT Tony Cooper >> <tony_cooper213@mungedyahoo.com> wrote: ... [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > >I supect he does it on purpose. It's part of his AUE act. I don't think that it's an act. Yeah, there's a certain amount image maintenance, but when he says he doesn't know what a word means, or the meaning of a reference, I don't think he's playing like he doesn't understand. He doesn't.
I don't see anything at all wrong with not knowing the meaning of some of the words used here. I don't see anything at all wrong with not catching some of the references. In many cases, those of us that do know the meaning or the reference only do so because we've been around longer and have been exposed to more.
It's not an act or a indication of lack of intelligence for someone Joey's age not to recognize "Goldwynism". I'd never heard of the term, and never knew about Goldwyn being known for I'd call "Berraisms", but I'm old enough to know who Sam Goldwyn was and able to make the mental jump - based on the context - without looking anything up. I can't fault Joey for not being able to do this.
What I can blame Joey for is not having the initiative to make even a rudimentary effort to figure it out for himself. First hit on Google for "Goldwynisms" explains it.
Frankly, I can't understand being willing to appear to be so stupid and lazy. Looking stupid should be done inadvertently like I do.
Michael Nitabach - 17 Jan 2004 17:25 GMT > Frankly, I can't understand being willing to appear to be so stupid > and lazy. Looking stupid should be done inadvertently like I do. This is why I think DE781 is a parody.
 Signature Mike Nitabach
DE781 - 17 Jan 2004 17:51 GMT Nitabach:
>> Frankly, I can't understand being willing to appear to be so stupid >> and lazy. Looking stupid should be done inadvertently like I do. > >This is why I think DE781 is a parody. EXPLAIN YOURSELF! A parody of WHAT? I just might tell you if you're right, if you give me the details!
DE781 - 17 Jan 2004 17:50 GMT Cooper:
>What I can blame Joey for is not having the initiative to make even a >rudimentary effort to figure it out for himself. First hit on Google >for "Goldwynisms" explains it. Look, you doesn't always know for sure that some AUE-fabricated term like "Goldwynism" is on Google. Fine! If that's the case, then you should have to Google "funner" and "racist" until you find the definition that's mines!
>Looking stupid should be done inadvertently like I do. Poser!
DE781 - 17 Jan 2004 17:00 GMT Valentine:
>} He's not stupid. He's got half of aue looking up definitions for him >} and he tells them that "That's not good enough. Explain it better". >} He's just lazy and manipulative. > >You say that like it's a bad thing. LOL, I guess it has its advantages. But, I don't like to be manipulative. Lazy? OK. Yes, I am lazy. Manipulation involves messing with other people, though, and I really, sort of, don't like to do that. You guys just know so much, why should I bother using Google and finding some moron's biased website when I can generally get the *real* answers here? Plus, you see, I used to not realize that you folks all just depended on Google *yourselves*. When Leah and I arrived here, we were conviced you all were super-geniuses or something. She even tried to tell me that people at the AUE were the people who wrote dictionaries and encyclopedias. I told her that that was most likely untrue.
Still, I find it very odd that all of you need Google for *everything*. The stuff you pass off as your own knowledge is really just Google and Wikipedia and other people's websites' knowledge. And then you find it shocking when I question things before resorting to Google. Well...I think that is how *most* people use message boards and the way AUEers use this place is in the minority.
>but lacks the ability to >} extrapolate or the initiative to examine. I don't lack the ability. I just find that stuff boring and unnecessary. If a minimal amount of work can earn you a B, why waste time and effort striving for an A+? It's not worth it.
>Pound for pound, >he has shown more improvement per year than a lot of people. How so? Just out of curiosity.
>Oddly enough, you're probably just what he needs to get him with the >program. Cooper? Why?
Tony Cooper - 17 Jan 2004 17:21 GMT >>but lacks the ability to >>} extrapolate or the initiative to examine. > >I don't lack the ability. I just find that stuff boring and unnecessary. If a >minimal amount of work can earn you a B, why waste time and effort striving for >an A+? It's not worth it. Based on your answer, you don't understand the word "extrapolate" and were too lazy to look it up.
>>Oddly enough, you're probably just what he needs to get him with the >>program. > >Cooper? Why? Because I should be a role model for you. I'm not as smart as the average bear here, but I keep up because I look up.
And, the above is an example of your "you Google everything'. I knew without looking it up that the Yogi Bear cartoons had the line "not as smart as the average bear" in them, but I wasn't sure if it was "smart" or "bright'. I Googled to verify. Yes, we Google, but mostly to verify or clarify what we already know. And, sometimes just to learn a little bit more about something we know something about.
DE781 - 17 Jan 2004 18:12 GMT Cooper:
>>>but lacks the ability to >>>} extrapolate or the initiative to examine. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >Based on your answer, you don't understand the word "extrapolate" and >were too lazy to look it up. Of course I do. It means that when I hear "I'm gonna say the PLEDGE" that I have to EXTRAPOLATE that to mean "SC Johnson & Wax/Johnson & Johnson" (which I *know* is all the same company). I don't likes extrapolationing!
>>>Oddly enough, you're probably just what he needs to get him with the >>>program. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Because I should be a role model for you. I'm not as smart as the >average bear here, but I keep up because I look up. No offense, Cooper, but if I wanted to present my true intelligence, I'd probably look smarter than MOST, if not all, here. I've already gone over reasons--most at least semi-serious--why I don't think *any* of you people are the sharpest tool in the thread. If you were, you'd have no trouble understanding what I'm about.
>And, the above is an example of your "you Google everything'. I knew >without looking it up that the Yogi Bear cartoons had the line "not as >smart as the average bear" in them, No, you're wrong. The line was "Yogi & BooBoo are smarter than the average bear".
And how's that intelligence? It's just ability to remember useless facts, which I have no problem doing. That isn't what makes me smart, though.
BTW, it was unnecessary for you to have Googled "Yogi Bear" because I could have just told you the answer. And, see? You didn't even get the RIGHT answer to your question. Google SUCKS, tha Murray Arnow-censoring P.O.S.!
> And, sometimes just to >learn a little bit more about something we know something about. Where's that bit of pointless trivia gonna get you later in life? BTW, comparing Yogi Bear to Yogi Berra is just gay and asinine. NO ONE finds that sh.t funny no more!
Tony Cooper - 17 Jan 2004 18:53 GMT >Cooper: > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >have to EXTRAPOLATE that to mean "SC Johnson & Wax/Johnson & Johnson" (which I >*know* is all the same company). I don't likes extrapolationing! It doesn't mean that at all. In this context, it means to project or extend one bit of knowledge into another area. If you understood, you would have caught my band-aids and mops reference. If "Pledge" was used as a clue to SC Johnson, then "band-aid" was a clue to another Johnson. The extrapolation is using the concept of associating the item with the maker.
With your interest in ghetto, "hair relaxer" would have been a better clue. (Although George is no longer in the business)
And, SC Johnson and Johnson & Johnson are totally unrelated companies.
Richard Maurer - 18 Jan 2004 03:44 GMT << [Tony Cooper] And, SC Johnson and Johnson & Johnson are totally unrelated companies. [end quote] >>
But easier to confuse nowadays, since all of those bottles with "Johnson and Johnson" printed on them disappeared from the shelves some years ago. Nowadays you see some similar items with just "Johnson" printed on them. I was surprised to see that the company is still officially called "Johnson and Johnson".
-- --------------------------------------------- Richard Maurer To reply, remove half Sunnyvale, California of a homonym of a synonym for also. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- (Put that name change in the negative column)
Tony Cooper - 18 Jan 2004 04:14 GMT ><< [Tony Cooper] >And, SC Johnson and Johnson & Johnson are totally unrelated companies. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >I was surprised to see that the company is still officially called >"Johnson and Johnson". I haven't noticed this. A quick root through the medicine cabinet turned up a package of Topper 4 x 4 dressing sponges with the familiar Johnson & Johnson in red script. I don't know how old the package is.
DE781 - 18 Jan 2004 04:07 GMT Cooper:
>If you understood, you >would have caught my band-aids and mops reference Yeah, yeah, because Johnson & Johnson owns Band Aid (brand) and all that. But, so what? It still doesn't make the joke funny. And I *still* don't get what the mopping up blood has to do with anything.
>And, SC Johnson and Johnson & Johnson are totally unrelated companies. I know.
Maria Conlon - 17 Jan 2004 19:55 GMT > ....I've already > gone over reasons--most at least semi-serious--why I don't think > *any* of you people are the sharpest tool in the thread. If you > were, you'd have no trouble understanding what I'm about. "...[S]harpest tool in the thread"? That doesn't quite work, IMO. Replacing "shed" with "thread" wasn't enough to make the phrase funny or truly clever. Can you try again? I'd be curious to see what you come up with. I personally can't think of a "thread" line that sounds satisfactory to me. Maybe you can.
Just a comment.
 Signature Maria Conlon Please send any email to the Hot Mail address.
DE781 - 18 Jan 2004 04:09 GMT Maria:
>"...[S]harpest tool in the thread"? That doesn't quite work, IMO. >Replacing "shed" with "thread" wasn't enough to make the phrase funny or >truly clever. It honestly wasn't meant to be a joke. It was some kind of Freudian slip, more likely than not. When I'm here, I tend to have "posts" and "threads" on the brain. I had entirely meant to write "shed". Still, were my error an intentional joke, I think it would be up to par with the AUE's corny sense of humor, at the very least.
Michael Nitabach - 18 Jan 2004 19:35 GMT > Still, were my error an > intentional joke, I think it would be up to par with the AUE's > corny sense of humor, at the very least. You've slipped out of your parodic voice here.
 Signature Mike Nitabach
DE781 - 18 Jan 2004 20:23 GMT Nitabach:
>> Still, were my error an >> intentional joke, I think it would be up to par with the AUE's >> corny sense of humor, at the very least. > >You've slipped out of your parodic voice here. I see. It appears that you're on the right track with me. Now, can anyone tell me *why* I might adopt different tones with different people and when responding to different posts?
Simon R. Hughes - 18 Jan 2004 22:22 GMT > Nitabach: > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > tell me *why* I might adopt different tones with different people and when > responding to different posts? Lack of character? Lack of conviction? Lack of identity?
 Signature Simon R. Hughes Off topic, but non-anti-American.
DE781 - 18 Jan 2004 22:39 GMT Hughes:
>Now, can anyone >> tell me *why* I might adopt different tones with different people and when >> responding to different posts? > >Lack of character? Lack of conviction? Lack of identity? Wrong, wrong, and, oh yeah, wrong.
R J Valentine - 19 Jan 2004 02:38 GMT } Hughes: } }>Now, can anyone }>> tell me *why* I might adopt different tones with different people and when }>> responding to different posts? }> }>Lack of character? Lack of conviction? Lack of identity? } } Wrong, wrong, and, oh yeah, wrong.
Not knowing the difference between spin and a bank shot?
 Signature R. J. Valentine <mailto:rj@smart.net>
DE781 - 19 Jan 2004 17:54 GMT Valentine:
>}>Now, can anyone >}>> tell me *why* I might adopt different tones with different people and [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >Not knowing the difference between spin and a bank shot? Huh? I don't get it.
Don Phillipson - 17 Jan 2004 20:13 GMT > >I don't lack the ability. I just find that stuff boring and unnecessary. If a > >minimal amount of work can earn you a B, why waste time and effort striving for > >an A+? It's not worth it. 1. One of the early purposes of schooling is to show people how to complete an assignment they think boring and unnecessary. The reason is that you will probably need to do so in adult life, and will suffer or miss a valuable opportunity if you fail. These businesslike habits hurt least when acquired young. It is bad luck that your education failed in this early task.
2. Grades in school are not awarded for the benefit of the student but for the benefit of the teachers and administrators. With luck, you will discover before leaving school the difference between learning and grades. (We usually discover this for ourselves, because some teachers do not know this and fewer admit it.)
3. The general idea of "curriculum" is to expose you to lots of things (foreign languages, science, history, poetry, etc.) because (1) enjoyment in life usually means being passionately interested in at least one thing and (2) nobody knows whether you are likeliest to be interested in geology or paintings or grammar or medicine. So schools use the shotgun approach, exposing all students to all subjects. The only serious failures in school are those students who never find out what interests them; and even then they may later find out via TV, newspapers, chance etc. -- Don Phillipson Carlsbad Springs (Ottawa, Canada)
Michael Nitabach - 17 Jan 2004 17:30 GMT > If a > minimal amount of work can earn you a B, why waste time and effort > striving for an A+? Because eventually those who earn the Bs with minimal effort end up carrying water for those who invest the time and effort striving for As.
> It's not worth it. I guess it depends upon where you see yourself ten years from now.
 Signature Mike Nitabach
DE781 - 17 Jan 2004 18:14 GMT Nitabach:
>Because eventually those who earn the Bs with minimal effort end up >carrying water for those who invest the time and effort striving for >As. I doubt that. If it's true, so what? I wait till I'm 30, living at home, and then I go to grad school and get straight A's, taking one course at a time. That makes me "smart", I guess? Oh well, if you people are happy living in such a screwy world, I don't care. I KNOW how to manipulate people, if need be. How sad, that that's what you think we must do.
>> It's not worth it. > >I guess it depends upon where you see yourself ten years from now. Loaded.
John Dean - 19 Jan 2004 02:13 GMT > Nitabach: > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > home, and then I go to grad school and get straight A's, taking one > course at a time. That makes me "smart", I guess? Not by comparison with the people with whom you are competing for the alpha-positions, and comparison is exactly what prospective employers are interested in. A student who has all the necessary As by the time they're 21 will look like a good prospect. One who doesn't get the requisite number until they're 40 will look like a dumb sh.t. The student who takes all the courses within a few years will have shown the necessary application to succeed. The student who takes one course at a time and doesn't start a new one until they've passed the old one will look like a plodder. Getting straight As doesn't 'make' anyone smart. Though smart people are often capable of straight As. Not starting until you're 30 the kind of courses that the average student is up for at 18 will certainly not persuade anyone you're smart.
-- John Dean Oxford De-frag to reply
Wood Avens - 19 Jan 2004 16:53 GMT >Not by comparison with the people with whom you are competing for the >alpha-positions, and comparison is exactly what prospective employers are [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >courses that the average student is up for at 18 will certainly not persuade >anyone you're smart. From my corner as a (retired) Open University academic, I think this is too much of a generalisation not to challenge.
Of some people, what you say is certainly true. However, in my experience the person who, for whatever reason, has failed or abandoned or simply never taken any exams after the age of 16 or 18 but who then returns at the age of 30 or 40 and works their way to a good degree, concurrently holding down a job and bringing up a family, demonstrates to the satisfaction of the discriminating employer an equal level of intellectual ability to that of the 21-year-old graduate, and a higher level of motivation, stickability, ability to organise their time, and varied experience of life.
Not that I'm recommending this approach to any current student uncertain about whether to continue their education, and certainly not to anyone who thinks this alternative would be easier. It's not. It's a damn sight harder work. Another factor occasionally given due credit.
 Signature Katy Jennison
spamtrap: remove number to reply
DE781 - 21 Jan 2004 21:05 GMT Dean:
>Getting straight As doesn't 'make' anyone smart. Exactly my point. Grades don't matter.
>Though smart people are >often capable of straight As. But, they generally realize that it's a waste to work their a.ses off for an A rather than a B.
>Not starting until you're 30 the kind of >courses that the average student is up for at 18 will certainly not persuade >anyone you're smart. Why? You said it yourself: grades don't make you smart. Laziness shouldn't count against anyone.
Michael Nitabach - 23 Jan 2004 03:25 GMT > Dean: > >>Getting straight As doesn't 'make' anyone smart. > > Exactly my point. Grades don't matter. Grades per se may not matter, but the self-discipline and study required to get As do matter.
>>Though smart people are >>often capable of straight As. > > But, they generally realize that it's a waste to work their a.ses > off for an A rather than a B. It may be a waste to work one's a.s off solely to obtain an A, but it is far from a waste to work one's a.s off. Those who achieve success in their lives have almost invariably worked their a.ses off. Life is not a TV show.
>>Not starting until you're 30 the kind of >>courses that the average student is up for at 18 will certainly >>not persuade anyone you're smart. > > Why? You said it yourself: grades don't make you smart. Laziness > shouldn't count against anyone. Grades don't make you smart. Discipline and study make you smart. Good grades are merely a side-effect.
 Signature Mike Nitabach
DE781 - 23 Jan 2004 23:06 GMT Nitabach:
>Grades per se may not matter, but the self-discipline and study >required to get As do matter. I will have self-discipline when the work I'm doing actually matters.
>Life is >not a TV show. Yes it is.
>Good grades are merely a side-effect. But, even dummies can get good grades with enough effort. They're meaningless.
Evan Kirshenbaum - 24 Jan 2004 00:08 GMT > Nitabach: > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > I will have self-discipline when the work I'm doing actually > matters. Ah, but the question is: How will you convince someone that you can so that they know that they can count on you enough to give you work that actually matters?
> >Life is not a TV show. > > Yes it is. I'm sorry. The quote is "Life's a show". "TV" was not specified, and the implication was that it was a stage show.
> >Good grades are merely a side-effect. > > But, even dummies can get good grades with enough effort. They're > meaningless. On the one hand we have someone who is either smart or a dummy who will actually put in enough effort to do the job. On the other hand we have...well, we don't really know. Might be someone smart who just didn't care; might be someone dumb who didn't care; might be someone who tried their hardest and couldn't do it. Who do you pick? Who do you even bother calling in for the interview?
Not that "straight A's" are worth all that much, although it does show that you can do pretty much anything you put your mind to, but a solid pattern of (at least mostly) A's in what you claim to be your area of expertise is very helpful. Until you've gotten some publication history or work experience, after which nobody cares what grades you got in school.
 Signature Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |If all else fails, embarrass the 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |industry into doing the right Palo Alto, CA 94304 |thing. | Dean Thompson kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com (650)857-7572
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/
DE781 - 24 Jan 2004 00:21 GMT Evan:
>Ah, but the question is: How will you convince someone that you can so >that they know that they can count on you enough to give you work that >actually matters? I sure have a way with convincing people *online* that I'm interesting. What makes you think it's any different offline?
>I'm sorry. The quote is "Life's a show". "TV" was not specified, and >the implication was that it was a stage show. All the world is a stage.
>Might be someone smart who just >didn't care; might be someone dumb who didn't care; might be someone >who tried their hardest and couldn't do it. And how's any of that different than:
>On the one hand we have someone who is either smart or a dummy who >will actually put in enough effort to do the job ?
In both cases, you're as likely to get a dummy as not. Well, actually, you're more likely to get a dummy out of the group who "put in effort", because dummies always feel they have to "prove" themselves. Smart people are intelligent enough to realize that high school and college achievements, especially arbitrary grades, are meaningless.
> but a solid >pattern of (at least mostly) A's in what you claim to be your area of >expertise is very helpful. Well, right now I have a pattern of mostly B's in general and in my "areas of expertise". I'm fine with that and most rational people should be too.
>Until you've gotten some publication >history And, luckily for me, AUE has provided me that opportunity. All an employer has to do is visit the AUE and look through my Google history. Where else can such words of wisdom be found?
>or work experience See above.
>after which nobody cares what grades you >got in school. Good. So my plan is working out then.
Evan Kirshenbaum - 24 Jan 2004 00:56 GMT > Evan:
> >Might be someone smart who just didn't care; might be someone dumb > >who didn't care; might be someone who tried their hardest and [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > ? Either one will be able to do the job.
> In both cases, you're as likely to get a dummy as not. Well, > actually, you're more likely to get a dummy out of the group who > "put in effort", because dummies always feel they have to "prove" > themselves. And it wasn't Statistics, either, was it?
Okay, let's take it slowly, with some hypothetical numbers. Say 10% of the population is "smart" and the other 90% are "dummies". Say further that 80% of the smart people will get A's because, hey, they're smart. (The other 20% could get A's but don't bother.) On the other hand, by virtue of excessive effort, 30% of the dummies also manage to get A's. (I'm exaggerating the numbers in your favor here.) So we can conclude that 0.1*0.8+0.9*0.3 = 35% of the students get A's.
Now, what's the likelihood that a given student is smart? If they got A's, then we're looking at
P(smart|A's) = P(A's|smart)*P(smart)/P(A's) = 0.8 * 0.1 / 0.35 = ~0.229
so only a bit more than a fifth of the people who get A's are smart. Now let's look at the other group.
P(smart|not A's) = P(not A's|smart)*P(smart)/P(not A's) = 0.2 * 0.1 / 0.65 = ~0.031
So only about one in thirty students who doesn't get A's is smart. Given one student who gets A's and one who doesn't, the one who gets A's is a more than seven times as likely to be smart.
> Smart people are intelligent enough to realize that high school and > college achievements, especially arbitrary grades, are meaningless. Yeah, but most actual smart people get good grades anyway, because it doesn't take any tremendous amount of "work".
> > but a solid pattern of (at least mostly) A's in what you claim to > >be your area of expertise is very helpful. > > Well, right now I have a pattern of mostly B's in general and in my > "areas of expertise". I'm fine with that and most rational people > should be too. To me that says "respectable, capable, but don't expect too much, and he either didn't see the subject as interesting enough to warrant putting in the effort or that's the best he can do". (Of course, it matters whether that's "mostly B's with a few A's" or "mostly B's with a few C's".)
> >Until you've gotten some publication history > > And, luckily for me, AUE has provided me that opportunity. This is a vanity press. It doesn't really count, although we'll read unrefereed tech reports if that's all that's available.
> All an employer has to do is visit the AUE and look through my > Google history. Luckily for you, nobody will make that effort.
 Signature Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |Code should be designed to make it 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |easy to get it right, not to work Palo Alto, CA 94304 |if you get it right.
kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com (650)857-7572
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/
DE781 - 24 Jan 2004 20:43 GMT Evan:
>> >On the one hand we have someone who is either smart or a dummy who >> >will actually put in enough effort to do the job >> >> ? > >Either one will be able to do the job. Nope, either way you don't know if you're getting a *smart* person, or a *dumb* person.
>And it wasn't Statistics, either, was it? What about Stats? I *know* how to use them! And I *did*!
>Okay, let's take it slowly, with some hypothetical numbers. Say 10% >of the population is "smart" and the other 90% are "dummies". OK.
> Say >further that 80% of the smart people will get A's because, hey, >they're smart. (The other 20% could get A's but don't bother.) No. Of smart people, only like 10% care about getting A's (usually the borderline smart people), because the other 90% realize that A's are meaningless. I am in the "other 90%" most of the time.
> On >the other hand, by virtue of excessive effort, 30% of the dummies also >manage to get A's. (I'm exaggerating the numbers in your favor here.) No. More like 50 or 60% of dummies get A's because of easier schooling, compensation for retardation, and desperation to "prove" themselves able. If you ain't got the standardized test scores, you gotta FUDGE your way into college with "grades", especially A's, extracurriculars, clubs, sports, music, community service, church groups, schtich, cheerleading, eating your own sh.t, or whatever else you need to make yourself "stand out" from the nomalcy that you are. Take American Idol...95% of the people with the costumes and the makeup and the flamboyance and the pets and the relatives and the attitudes and the skateboards and the impersonations and the duets and the wild hairdoos and everything else SUCK. Whereas 95% of the people who are "real" move on. Mediocrity always tries to cover itself up with gimmicks. Grades and extracurricular activites and wealth and celebrity are the GIMMICKS that dumbos use to move up in life. If only we all had Simon Cowell judging who is qualified and who is not for job apps, & sh.t.
>So we can conclude that 0.1*0.8+0.9*0.3 = 35% of the students get >A's. I don't know how to statisticize it, but whatever. OK, 35%.
OK, if 10% of all smart people get A's, and 50 or 60% of dumbos do, then *more* smart people don't get A's than do. However, *more* dumbos get A's than don't.
Therefore, out of the group of people who *don't* get A's, you're more likely to find the smart peeps.
It's COMMON SENSE.
>Yeah, but most actual smart people get good grades anyway, because it >doesn't take any tremendous amount of "work". Not true. It depends on the courses you take and where you go to college. My school *hardly* ever gives out A's. With minimal work, I'm still up in the 90th percentile somewhere, though, gradeswise, where the average, I've learnt, is 2.4-ish.
>and >he either didn't see the subject as interesting enough to warrant >putting in the effort Exactly. But when dinero is involved, *then* I will work to my full ability. It's obvious to others of intelligence.
>(Of course, it >matters whether that's "mostly B's with a few A's" or "mostly B's with >a few C's".) Mostly B's with a handfull of A's and a handfull of C's. Actually, I think I've had 5 or 6 A's and only 4 or 5 C's. So, I'm still ahead.
>> And, luckily for me, AUE has provided me that opportunity. > >This is a vanity press. It doesn't really count, although we'll read >unrefereed tech reports if that's all that's available. Huh?
>> All an employer has to do is visit the AUE and look through my >> Google history. > >Luckily for you, nobody will make that effort. I'm sure they will. I'll encourage it.
Evan Kirshenbaum - 24 Jan 2004 21:56 GMT > Evan: > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Nope, either way you don't know if you're getting a *smart* person, > or a *dumb* person. Clue time. Most employers don't care whether somebody is smart or dumb as long as they can do the job. A dumb person who shows that they will do (and are able to do) whatever is necessary to do the job is just fine.
> >And it wasn't Statistics, either, was it? > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > the borderline smart people), because the other 90% realize that A's > are meaningless. I am in the "other 90%" most of the time. Perhaps we have different thresholds for "smart". Most people I consider smart would have to actively work at not getting A's most of the time. Only 10% may care about it, but 80-90% will get them anyway.
> > On the other hand, by virtue of excessive effort, 30% of the > >dummies also manage to get A's. (I'm exaggerating the numbers in [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > themselves able. If you ain't got the standardized test scores, you > gotta FUDGE your way into college with "grades", I presumed we were talking about college. Nobody's going to give a sh.t about your high school grades once you graduate.
> >So we can conclude that 0.1*0.8+0.9*0.3 = 35% of the students get > >A's. > > I don't know how to statisticize it, Math major, eh?
> but whatever. OK, 35%. No, you've changed it to 46-55%.
> >Yeah, but most actual smart people get good grades anyway, because it > >doesn't take any tremendous amount of "work". > > Not true. It depends on the courses you take and where you go to > college. My school *hardly* ever gives out A's. And yet 50-60% of the "dummies" manage to get them in each class. I guess that works if the vast bulk of the students are "smart" and therefore don't get good grades.
> >and he either didn't see the subject as interesting enough to > >warrant putting in the effort > > Exactly. But when dinero is involved, *then* I will work to my full > ability. At what? Who's going to hire you? I can just see your cover letter: "I didn't get good grades because I'm too smart to put in the effort, so you actually have no idea what I'm capable of, but trust me--if you're willing to pay me I'll put in the effort and I'll be able to do whatever you ask". There are 200 other resumes in the pile.
> It's obvious to others of intelligence. > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > I think I've had 5 or 6 A's and only 4 or 5 C's. So, I'm still > ahead. If you think of A's and C's as balancing, don't put on airs about how "smart" you think you are. That many C's in an entire college career in courses having anything to do with the major would get me thinking "This guy had better have some damn good references, test scores, and something substantial like a publication or honors project to balance it." I'll buy the "too lazy to work for A's", but if you can't sleepwalk through a course and get at least a B-, that's a red flag.
(Take this as advice from somebody who actually *has* been involved with reading resumes and making the decision on who to interview.)
> >> And, luckily for me, AUE has provided me that opportunity. > > > >This is a vanity press. It doesn't really count, although we'll > >read unrefereed tech reports if that's all that's available. > > Huh? Which part was unclear? A paper that you decide is worthy of publication is much less valuable than one that somebody else does, so a conference paper, journal paper, dissertation, or book (chapter) is what will be read. Failing that, a self-published report, like a technical report, will be read to get an idea of what kind of work you do.
> >> All an employer has to do is visit the AUE and look through my > >> Google history. > > > >Luckily for you, nobody will make that effort. > > I'm sure they will. I'll encourage it. I see. How?
 Signature Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |Your claim might have more 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |credibility if you hadn't mispelled Palo Alto, CA 94304 |"inteligent"
kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com (650)857-7572
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/
Tony Cooper - 24 Jan 2004 22:54 GMT >If you think of A's and C's as balancing, don't put on airs about how >"smart" you think you are. That many C's in an entire college career [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >(Take this as advice from somebody who actually *has* been involved >with reading resumes and making the decision on who to interview.) You said something on this same order before. It's not wrong, but it's certainly not right. What you are referring to is part of the job market but not all of the job market.
The "skaters" in college usually end up with pretty good jobs. They are just not jobs of a certain type. I suspect that what you would call a "good job" *is* a job that requires top grades. Perhaps your floor at HP is stocked with these jobs, but that's not the job market.
If you imagine the job market as a bell curve, jobs for people with brains and good grades are at one end, and jobs for people with charm and personality are at the other. Towards the middle there are jobs that require some smarts and some personality.
Now, do a bell curve for income from jobs. You could damn near superimpose them. The really smart guys aren't making that much more than the really dumb guys. The guys with ordinary smarts and a good personality are up at the top of the bell.
Evan Kirshenbaum - 24 Jan 2004 23:22 GMT > >If you think of A's and C's as balancing, don't put on airs about > >how "smart" you think you are. That many C's in an entire college [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > it's certainly not right. What you are referring to is part of the > job market but not all of the job market. Good point.
> The "skaters" in college usually end up with pretty good jobs. They > are just not jobs of a certain type. I suspect that what you would > call a "good job" *is* a job that requires top grades. Perhaps your > floor at HP is stocked with these jobs, but that's not the job market. It's not so much "requires top grades" as "We've got three hundred resumes for this position, we'll phone screen maybe twenty or thirty, and we'll aim for bringing in four or five for interviews (a full day, with several people). You need something to make people give you a second look, or they'll never find out about your winning personality.
I suspect it's different for jobs in which you expect to talk for ten minutes with anybody who's interested in the job.
> If you imagine the job market as a bell curve, jobs for people with > brains and good grades are at one end, and jobs for people with [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > more than the really dumb guys. The guys with ordinary smarts and a > good personality are up at the top of the bell. Definitely. My kind of job tends to have a better starting salary, but there's a bigger upside potential for the other, and, as you say, the entry requirements aren't as steep.
 Signature Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |Of course, over the first 10^-10 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |seconds and 10^-30 cubic Palo Alto, CA 94304 |centimeters it averages out to |zero, but when you look in kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com |detail.... (650)857-7572 | Philip Morrison
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/
Tony Cooper - 25 Jan 2004 00:06 GMT >It's not so much "requires top grades" as "We've got three hundred >resumes for this position, we'll phone screen maybe twenty or thirty, [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >I suspect it's different for jobs in which you expect to talk for ten >minutes with anybody who's interested in the job. That's a bit snobbish. A company will spend just as much time selecting a new sales manager as they will a new IT manager. The sales manager may have a far greater impact on the company.
I would doubt that HPs sales representatives are selected for their smarts. That's not to say they are not smart, but the campus recruiter really wasn't looking at their GPAs. A guy that took five years and barely got by may be a better choice than a whiz kid. The guy that took five years showed that he had perseverance and the ability to grind away. The whiz kid tends to show that he thinks he's smarter than the guy he's selling to.
It's not just sales. Wall Street and Madison Avenue have far more upper-income people that had GPAs in the 2s and 3s than in the 4s.
Evan Kirshenbaum - 25 Jan 2004 01:07 GMT > >It's not so much "requires top grades" as "We've got three hundred > >resumes for this position, we'll phone screen maybe twenty or [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > selecting a new sales manager as they will a new IT manager. The > sales manager may have a far greater impact on the company. Sure, but they're not going to hire a sales manager who has no experience. I presumed that since we were discussing school records that we were talking about entry-level jobs. Clearly, once you have relevant work experience, for most jobs what you did in school becomes completely meaningless. (Although in our case, we do still look at publications.)
To come clean, most of of the people I've been involved in interviewing have advanced degrees, and in such cases, we *don't* tend to look at grades. "Got into and out of grad school" is usually a pretty good proxy, and we often know something about their program and advisor and usually there are publications to look at, which give you a better sense of what the person is capable of.
> I would doubt that HPs sales representatives are selected for their > smarts. That's not to say they are not smart, but the campus [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > ability to grind away. The whiz kid tends to show that he thinks > he's smarter than the guy he's selling to. I'm not sure, but I suspect that entry-level sales positions are typically "interview (nearly) all applicants and see what kind of feeling you get" positions. And you don't make all that much in the beginning (although if you *are* good you can do well on commissions).
But if you're talking "send in your resume and wait for a response" positions, you need something that will make you stand out.
 Signature Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |English grammar is not taught in 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |primary or secondary schools in the Palo Alto, CA 94304 |United States. Sometimes some |mythology is taught under that kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com |rubric, but luckily it's usually (650)857-7572 |ignored, except by the credulous. | John Lawler http://www.kirshenbaum.net/
DE781 - 26 Jan 2004 21:26 GMT Cooper:
>people that had GPAs in the 2s and 3s than in the 4s. "In the 4's"? That suggests schools that use some kind of shady scaling, such that an A is *not* a 4.0. The Ivys use such shadiness (who else?).
But, a school like Holy Cross, does not give grades higher than A/4.0. If you graduate with a 4.0, you GOT STRAIGHT A's, COULDN'T HAVE DONE BETTER. Does this not make sense?
Also, they scale it so that "-" grades are weighted much more negatively than "+" grades. Ain't nodoby gon' accuse an HC student with a 3.something of being dumb! How can it be any BETTER, literally??!!
Evan Kirshenbaum - 27 Jan 2004 01:07 GMT > Cooper: > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > scaling, such that an A is *not* a 4.0. The Ivys use such shadiness > (who else?). I wasn't aware of that. Do you have a citation? I know that most schools give different amounts of weight to different courses (does Holy Cross not do that?), but I don't know of any universities (or colleges) that actually change the scale the way many high schools (mine included) do.
> But, a school like Holy Cross, does not give grades higher than > A/4.0. If you graduate with a 4.0, you GOT STRAIGHT A's, COULDN'T [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > with a 3.something of being dumb! How can it be any BETTER, > literally??!! It makes sense if Holy Cross doesn't give A+'s. But in any case, I'd take anything above 3.7 (or whatever the school gives for an A-, perhaps a bit lower) as "an A average", broadly construed.
 Signature Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |It is error alone which needs the 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |support of government. Truth can Palo Alto, CA 94304 |stand by itself. | Thomas Jefferson kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com (650)857-7572
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/
DE781 - 27 Jan 2004 18:24 GMT Evan:
>I wasn't aware of that. Do you have a citation? Yes. My friend who goes to Columbia has a 4.2 GPA. *How* could that be possible if everything was legit?
>most >schools give different amounts of weight to different courses (does >Holy Cross not do that?) Nope. Everything is equal.
>but I don't know of any universities (or >colleges) that actually change the scale the way many high schools >(mine included) do. My high school didn't even use GPA. They used numbers. As does Leah's college.
>But in any case, I'd >take anything above 3.7 (or whatever the school gives for an A-, >perhaps a bit lower Yes. A-. But since a B+ is a 3.3, then technically an "A" average is anything above 3.5. I *may* be up there in the end. I will be around 3.3.-3.5, most likely.
And that's "not good"?
Evan Kirshenbaum - 27 Jan 2004 23:04 GMT > Evan: > > >I wasn't aware of that. Do you have a citation? > > Yes. My friend who goes to Columbia has a 4.2 GPA. *How* could > that be possible if everything was legit? Well, if an A+ is 4.3, as it's usually scored, then two A+'s and an A would be 4.2.
> >most schools give different amounts of weight to different courses > >(does Holy Cross not do that?) > > Nope. Everything is equal. At Stanford, each course was given a certain number of "units", typically three to five, ostensibly based on (but not equivalent to) the number of hours you were expected to have to devote each week. Intensive classes with significant labs or projects might be worth more (up to nine or ten) and seminars and most PE classes were one or maybe two. When you registered, you had to sign up for a certain number of units, typically 15 to 18, so the number of classes might vary each quarter. (Not passing 12 got you put on academic probabation and you had to petition to get more than, I believe, 20.)
Of course, what actually happened was that each department set the number of units its courses were worth based on the number of classes they thought their majors should take each quarter. So History and English classes tended to be five units, Psychology and Sociology tended to be four, and Math, science, and engineering classes tended to be three. Since nobody ever officially calculated GPA except occaisionally over the courses "in your major", this didn't really matter, but it did lead to some interesting situations when calculating GPA when applying to grad schools.
> >But in any case, I'd take anything above 3.7 (or whatever the > >school gives for an A-, perhaps a bit lower > > Yes. A-. But since a B+ is a 3.3, then technically an "A" average > is anything above 3.5. I'd call that B+/A-. It's on the cusp.
> I *may* be up there in the end. I will be around 3.3.-3.5, most > likely. > > And that's "not good"? It's okay. Nothing to get too excited about, but certainly nothing to be ashamed of. I wouldn't toss a resume in the discard pile based on that, but I'd certainly be looking for something else in there, like a consistent pattern of high grades in some concentrated area, showing that when the person was interested they could do a good job.
I should note that I'm not an HR person.[1] The interviewing I've been involved with has been mostly for researcher positions (also for interns), and, of course, like everybody else, we haven't been doing much hiring in the past few years. We often hired people out of school, but it was usually people with at least a master's degree, so grades typically weren't as important as other evidence that they knew their stuff. We would look for experience in the domain (whatever that might have been) but far more importantly evidence that they could think critically and inventively in the domain even if their experience was elsewhere, as it often was. Resumes would be culled to find people to interview by phone, and those that passed the screen would be invited for a full day of interviews which involved giving a presentation (on pretty literally *anything* they had worked on...mine was on HPSG and the group had nothing to do with linguistics) and talking one-on-one with researchers for half and hour or so apiece. It was a big commitment of time on everybody's part, and we often paid to fly them out, so we tried to be pretty careful about making sure it was worth everybody's while.
[1] You asked earlier what I do. I do computer science research. I alternate between telling people I'm a computer scientist and a software engineer, but in the past few years the computer science part has tended to dominate in the actual research, although I do a fair bit of building as well.
 Signature Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |If you think health care is 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |expensive now, wait until you see Palo Alto, CA 94304 |what it costs when it's free. | P.J. O'Rourke kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com (650)857-7572
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/
Skitt - 27 Jan 2004 23:41 GMT > ... We [HP] often hired people out of school, but it was usually > people with at least a master's degree, so grades typically > weren't as important as other evidence that they knew their stuff. Often? Maybe, but when I was still in the job market, HP had the reputation of hiring only people straight out of school, getting them before they were "ruined" by working for another company.
Since I had started my career at Lockheed, I never considered applying at HP, even though I might have liked to work for them when I was considering moving to the Loveland, Colorado area. I got hired by STC instead, but they reneged on that a week later, before anything had become cast in concrete. Their reason was the recession that hit there first, before affecting the SF Bay Area. That was around 1964, I think.
 Signature Skitt (in Hayward, California) www.geocities.com/opus731/
Evan Kirshenbaum - 28 Jan 2004 00:01 GMT > > ... We [HP] often hired people out of school, but it was usually "My groups within the research labs at HP", please.
> > people with at least a master's degree, so grades typically > > weren't as important as other evidence that they knew their stuff. > > Often? Maybe, but when I was still in the job market, HP had the > reputation of hiring only people straight out of school, getting > them before they were "ruined" by working for another company. That certainly wasn't the case in any of the groups I worked at. New grads were good because they were typically up on the latest stuff, but they were almost always viewed as "potential" rather than proven talent.
I can't speak to the practices at the product divisions (or even their R&D organizations).
> Since I had started my career at Lockheed, I never considered > applying at HP, even though I might have liked to work for them when [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > recession that hit there first, before affecting the SF Bay Area. > That was around 1964, I think. A bit before my time.
 Signature Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |The Elizabethans had so many words 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |for the female genitals that it is Palo Alto, CA 94304 |quite hard to speak a sentence of |modern English without inadvertently kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com |mentioning at least three of them. (650)857-7572 | Terry Pratchett
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/
DE781 - 28 Jan 2004 04:05 GMT Evan:
>Well, if an A+ is 4.3, as it's usually scored, then two A+'s and an A >would be 4.2. Well, my school doesn't give out A+'s. That was my point.
R J Valentine - 28 Jan 2004 03:26 GMT ... } Yes. My friend who goes to Columbia has a 4.2 GPA. *How* could that be } possible if everything was legit? ...
Man, the grading system at Harvard would blow your mind. Get Dr. Whom to explain them to you. They have more different grades than you can shake a stick at. I know someone who managed to get every single one of them.
The trick for getting low grades is getting them in the hardest possible courses. There's a down side to getting all A's if you don't take all the hardest courses.
 Signature R. J. Valentine <mailto:arjay@wicked.smart.net> Got a D+ (lowest grade still on my transcript) in one of my major courses.
Aaron J. Dinkin - 28 Jan 2004 19:11 GMT > Man, the grading system at Harvard would blow your mind. Get Dr. Whom to > explain them to you. Actually, I think as of next year or last near or some year that's not too far off, Harvard is switching from its A=15, A-=14, B+=12 system to a more conventional A=4 system. End of an era, wot.
> The trick for getting low grades is getting them in the hardest possible > courses. There's a down side to getting all A's if you don't take all the > hardest courses. Of course some of the very hardest courses give out only A's, on the principle that in a class like that, just being able to hold your head above water is a sign that you deserve a good grade.
-Aaron J. Dinkin Dr. Whom
DE781 - 26 Jan 2004 21:23 GMT Evan:
>Definitely. My kind of job tends to have a better starting salary, >but there's a bigger upside potential for the other, and, as you say, >the entry requirements aren't as steep. What exactly do you do? Are you like a secretary for HP? Why is that a high salary job?
Aaron J. Dinkin - 25 Jan 2004 01:41 GMT >> Evan: [DE781 wrote:]
>> >> And, luckily for me, AUE has provided me that opportunity. >> > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Which part was unclear? I'd say it's who the "we" are that read unrefereed tech reports. It wasn't clear to me that you'd switched from your a.u.e-poster hat (signaled by the "this" in your first sentence above) to your prospective-employer hat.
-Aaron J. Dinkin Dr. Whom
DE781 - 26 Jan 2004 21:28 GMT Aaron:
>It >wasn't clear to me that you'd switched from your a.u.e-poster hat >(signaled by the "this" in your first sentence above) to your >prospective-employer hat. Right! You can't just do that. HTF was I to know he employs people? And you AUE folk call *me* confusing?
DE781 - 26 Jan 2004 21:21 GMT Evan:
>> Nope, either way you don't know if you're getting a *smart* person, >> or a *dumb* person. > >Clue time. Most employers don't care whether somebody is smart or >dumb as long as they can do the job. Well, that's asinine because a smart person can do *anything* he's taught; a dumb person can't do *anything*!
>Only 10% may care about it, but 80-90% will get them >anyway. Depends on what kind of a school you go to. If you go to Harvard, where they hand out A's, then, yes, that's true. 97%, to be exact.
My school ain't *THAT* corrupt!
>I presumed we were talking about college. Nobody's going to give a >sh.t about your high school grades once you graduate. We're talking about in general. HIGH SCHOOL grades get people into COLLEGE. DOOIIIIYYY!
>> I don't know how to statisticize it, > >Math major, eh? Yup, and a damn good one!
>> but whatever. OK, 35%. > >No, you've changed it to 46-55%. No, 35%!
>And yet 50-60% of the "dummies" manage to get them in each class. I >guess that works if the vast bulk of the students are "smart" and >therefore don't get good grades. Exactly.
>At what? Who's going to hire you? I can just see your cover letter: >"I didn't get good grades because I'm too smart to put in the effort, >so you actually have no idea what I'm capable of, but trust me--if >you're willing to pay me I'll put in the effort and I'll be able to do >whatever you ask". There are 200 other resumes in the pile. Well, whatever. Their loss. I don't want a job anyway. I wanna be my own boss.
>If you think of A's and C's as balancing, don't put on airs about how >"smart" you think you are. That many C's in an entire college career >in courses having anything to do with the major would get me thinking >"This guy had better have some damn good references, test scores, and >something substantial like a publication or honors project to balance >it." And I *will* have *great* test scores, like always.
> I'll buy the "too lazy to work for A's", but if you can't >sleepwalk through a course and get at least a B-, that's a red flag. It depends *where* the course is being taught and what the teacher is like. If the teacher doesn't teach, then, no, it's *not* very probable to get a B- or higher. Also, a B- is different at a good school, or at a school that uses the bell curve, than a crappy school.
>(Take this as advice from somebody who actually *has* been involved >with reading resumes and making the decision on who to interview.) Thanks, but I'll be fine.
>Which part was unclear? A paper that you decide is worthy of >publication is much less valuable than one that somebody else does, so >a conference paper, journal paper, dissertation, or book (chapter) is >what will be read. Failing that, a self-published report, like a >technical report, will be read to get an idea of what kind of work you >do. Got it.
>> >> All an employer has to do is visit the AUE and look through my >> >> Google history. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >I see. How? Tell them to Google it.
Evan Kirshenbaum - 26 Jan 2004 21:50 GMT > Evan: > >At what? Who's going to hire you? I can just see your cover [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Well, whatever. Their loss. I don't want a job anyway. I wanna be > my own boss. And I have every confidence that you will be.
 Signature Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |If I may digress momentarily from 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |the mainstream of this evening's Palo Alto, CA 94304 |symposium, I'd like to sing a song |which is completely pointless. kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com | Tom Lehrer (650)857-7572
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/
DE781 - 27 Jan 2004 18:20 GMT Evan:
>> Well, whatever. Their loss. I don't want a job anyway. I wanna be >> my own boss. > >And I have every confidence that you will be. Thank you.
Michael Nitabach - 25 Jan 2004 00:21 GMT de781@aol.com (DE781) wrote in news:20040124154335.12638.00000814@mb- m29.aol.com:
> Mediocrity always tries to cover itself up with gimmicks. It's so disappointing when you lose your voice. It jars me out of my state of willing suspension of disbelief.
 Signature Mike Nitabach
DE781 - 26 Jan 2004 21:32 GMT Nitabach:
>> Mediocrity always tries to cover itself up with gimmicks. > >It's so disappointing when you lose your voice. It jars me out of my >state of willing suspension of disbelief. I think we both realize you know the truth about me. Just come out and say it! ENLIGHTEN your fellow AUEers, please! For real...I wanna know just how much you know (or think you know). I'm serious. What's your deal?
Or are you just not as bright as I think you might be? You don't want that image to fade, do you? If it's all you've got, why not try to keep it? Eh?
Tony Cooper - 24 Jan 2004 03:53 GMT >Evan: > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >I sure have a way with convincing people *online* that I'm interesting. What >makes you think it's any different offline? Before you pop your arm out of the socket patting yourself on the back, think about how traffic slows down so people can gawk at a bad accident. The "interest" in you is more like "Hey! Look! The jaws of life!".
R J Valentine - 24 Jan 2004 06:23 GMT } On 24 Jan 2004 00:21:53 GMT, de781@aol.com (DE781) wrote: } }>Evan: }> }>> }>>Ah, but the question is: How will you convince someone that you can so }>>that they know that they can count on you enough to give you work that }>>actually matters? }> }>I sure have a way with convincing people *online* that I'm interesting. What }>makes you think it's any different offline? } } Before you pop your arm out of the socket patting yourself on the } back, think about how traffic slows down so people can gawk at a bad } accident. The "interest" in you is more like "Hey! Look! The jaws of } life!".
Ain't that the truth.
On the Capital Beltway (Interstate 495) westbound in Maryland (the Outer Loop, going counter-clockwise (BrE: "anticlockwise") around (and, for a bit over the Potomac, through) the District of Columbia, there is a distinct jog in the road (you may be able to see it on your free State Farm road atlas map of Washington, D.C.) around the Washington Temple of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (referred to by some locally as The Mormon Temple). Approaching it from the east, the spires seem to rise out of the road, only to be blocked by several bridges, then the complete temple again in all its glory. On one of the middle bridges, pranksters fairly regularly (since the temple was built) paint in large block letters "SURRENDER DOROTHY". (Maybe pictures of it are googlable.) Because it is visible for only a matter of seconds, if that, people tend to slam on their brakes, generally paralyzing traffic during rush hour. Word has it that for years now they have had a special crew on alert to paint out the "SURRENDER DOROTHY" as soon as it is reported in the morning, so as to keep the traffic moving as safely as possible. Even in between times, the sixteen rectangles are plainly visible to those who look for them.
The temple is sort of unique in not having windows, except for the stained glass in a narrow column in the stairwells at either end. Light gets in from the outside through the translucent marble that covers the temple. Inside it's pretty much nothing like the cathedral that might be imagined from the outside, having something like seven floors for various uses from baptisms in the huge font in the basement to locker rooms on the entrance floor to marriage-ceremony rooms upstairs and so on until you get to the tabernacle (of choir fame). They have their own government-certified police and fire departments, and outsiders aren't welcome, even for weddings. And it's not all that easy even for a card-carrying Mormon to get in. I hear they ripped up all the carpets and replaced them shortly after I was in there.
As metaphor for alt.usage.english, it's probably flawed; but they could do worse than to name the bridge after Young Joey.
 Signature R. J. Valentine <mailto:arjay@wicked.smart.net> (Got tickets from the guy that raised bald eagles in the apartment upstairs.)
DE781 - 24 Jan 2004 20:48 GMT Valentine:
>On one of the middle bridges, >pranksters fairly regularly (since the temple was built) paint in large >block letters "SURRENDER DOROTHY". HUH?! Who's "Dorothy"? Bea Arthur?
>I hear they ripped up all the carpets and replaced them shortly >after I was in there. Why was you in a Mormon temple?
>As metaphor for alt.usage.english, it's probably flawed; but they could >do worse than to name the bridge after Young Joey. What? Huh?
DE781 - 24 Jan 2004 20:44 GMT Coop:
>>I sure have a way with convincing people *online* that I'm interesting. >What [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >accident. The "interest" in you is more like "Hey! Look! The jaws of >life!". There's no such thing as bad publicity.
"Better to be remembered as a weirdo than to be forgotten"--The smartest woman in the history of the universe, Michael Jackson.
Laura F Spira - 17 Jan 2004 07:56 GMT >>>If DE781 is typical of US college students, I am thankful that I teach >>>in the UK higher education system, for all its shortcomings. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > As another aside, I don't think Laura thinks Americans are, in > general, stupid. I don't, and my post was not intended to be read in that way. I did have some preconceptions about the US educational system, though, but I have adjusted my ideas a little.
> Stupid as a few of us are, DE781 remains an anomaly. If this is indeed the case, I am surprised that so many US posters have taken this poster at face value and this is what prompted my comment. An interesting contrast to the response to Johnson who was viewed as too bright to be true: why isn't DE781 seen as too ignorant to be true?
> It might even be correct to say he's unique, in his level of > ignorance, among the college and high school students I've known. > Perhaps American students have been suffering from a considerably > dumbed-down educational system compared with my day, but I rather > doubt it. We're of the same generation and it's happened in the UK: why shouldn't it have happened in the US?
 Signature Laura (emulate St. George for email)
DE781 - 17 Jan 2004 17:05 GMT Laura:
>An >interesting contrast to the response to Johnson who was viewed as too >bright to be true: why isn't DE781 seen as too ignorant to be true? Hear, hear! I *told you* you peeps was unfair to CJ!
Laura F Spira - 17 Jan 2004 17:29 GMT > Laura: > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Hear, hear! I *told you* you peeps was unfair to CJ! Is the appropriate response to this a "whoosh" or a "duh"? <yawn>
 Signature Laura (emulate St. George for email)
DE781 - 17 Jan 2004 17:53 GMT Laura:
>> Hear, hear! I *told you* you peeps was unfair to CJ! > >Is the appropriate response to this a "whoosh" or a "duh"? <yawn> It's that yo momma f.cks beasts!
Michael Nitabach - 17 Jan 2004 17:31 GMT > why isn't DE781 seen as too ignorant to be true? He is by me.
 Signature Mike Nitabach
Sara Lorimer - 17 Jan 2004 22:08 GMT Laura F Spira wrote, in part:
> why isn't DE781 seen...? Kill files, m'dear, kill files.
 Signature SML, editing unfairly
ess el five six zero at columbia dot edu <http://pirate-women.com>
Dena Jo - 17 Jan 2004 23:06 GMT > why isn't DE781 seen as too ignorant to be true? That's exactly how I see YJ. He's putting on act. He wasn't at first, when he showed up a few months ago, but he soon learned what buttons to push, and he's been gleefully pushing them ever since.
 Signature Dena Jo
Delete "delete.this.for.email" for email.
DE781 - 18 Jan 2004 04:02 GMT DJ:
>> why isn't DE781 seen as too ignorant to be true? > >That's exactly how I see YJ. He's putting on act. He wasn't at first, >when he showed up a few months ago, but he soon learned what buttons to >push, and he's been gleefully pushing them ever since *Very* interesting idea!
Simon R. Hughes - 17 Jan 2004 08:43 GMT >>(As an aside: sigh. I vote for putting "Just how uncultured and stoopid >>are Americans, anyway?" in the FAQ and quit discussing it here.) > > Good idea, Sara. It could open an avenue for the likes of Simon Hughes > to post on topics of greater universal interest. The bloke I hung around with most when I lived in Sweden was an American. His name was Tom, and he came from Texas. I don't remember if he had ever seen snow before, but we used to throw snowballs at road signs and trees, as we walked down the road together. One time though, Tom was too close to the sign I threw the snowball at. As it burst, some of the snow hit Tom in the face. I laughed, and told him to mind himself. He went ballistic. He picked up handfuls of snow, formed it into rough snowballs and threw them at me in rapid succession. Every single one of them fell short, went long, or wide.
To begin with, I thought he was joking, so the more snowballs missed me, the more I laughed. That just made him angrier, which caused his aim to become all the more inaccurate. When I realised how seriously angry he was, all I could do was leave him there and walk home, shaking my head in disbelief. We laughed about it together the following day.
Let the reader understand what is written.
 Signature Simon R. Hughes
DE781 - 16 Jan 2004 20:33 GMT Laura:
> She is a bright but not outstanding student. After a lengthy >account of all the differences between her experience at Brookes and >that in Florida, she sighed deeply and said "It's going to be quite >difficult to get back to *proper* reading and thinking now." What a HO (both of you). At least WE had the sense not to change our way of speaking and acting to pretension.
DE781 - 15 Jan 2004 22:27 GMT Dean:
>> Richard, shirley. > >Do you know Google can't find a single well-known Richard Shirley to enable >me to make some stunning jokes? More phoney intellectualism, I see? Why do you people go *out of your ways* to appear to know useless triviar? It makes more work for us *all*! *Some* of us ain't gots the time!
Philip Eden - 21 Jan 2004 00:18 GMT > > Richard, shirley. > > Do you know Google can't find a single well-known Richard Shirley to enable > me to make some stunning jokes? > -- Ah, but didn't Shirley Richard play Wendy Brahms in To Serve Them All My Days?
pe
Christopher Johnson - 21 Jan 2004 03:41 GMT
> > > Richard, shirley. > > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Ah, but didn't Shirley Richard play Wendy Brahms in To Serve Them All My > Days? No. It was Shirley Brahms played by Wendy Richard in "Are You Suggesting I'm Common?".
But you knew that, right?
 Signature Christopher
(Change 3032 to 3232 to reply by private e-mail)
Mervyn Doobov - 21 Jan 2004 13:57 GMT > >> >> > > Richard, shirley. >> > >> > Do you know Google can't find a single well-known Richard Shirley >> > to enable me to make some stunning jokes?
>> -- >> Ah, but didn't Shirley Richard play Wendy Brahms in To Serve Them All [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > But you knew that, right?
I think it was in "Are you being served?"
 Signature Mervyn Doobov, Jerusalem, Israel.
DE781 - 15 Jan 2004 22:24 GMT Hughes:
>> A little *help* please; isn't the guy who invented Pledge "Mr. CLEAN"? > >Robert Nixon invented Pledge? The president of America? I'm *so* lost.
Skitt - 15 Jan 2004 02:06 GMT > Ross:
>>> "Before Webster (and his predecessors like >>> Benjamin Franklin), `center' and `color' were merely variant [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > I don't understand. Ssh! Don't let on!
 Signature Skitt (in Hayward, California) www.geocities.com/opus731/
R H Draney - 15 Jan 2004 05:38 GMT DE781 filted:
>Ross: > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >I don't understand. Actually, it seems the Pledge was invented by William Booth....r
Spehro Pefhany - 15 Jan 2004 06:36 GMT >DE781 filted: >> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > >Actually, it seems the Pledge was invented by William Booth....r How does that go, "Lemon Pledge, very pretty, puts the something something... "?
ObAUE: Why is the Salvation Army called the "Sally Anne"?
Best regards, Spehro Pefhany
 Signature "it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward" speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com
david56 - 15 Jan 2004 11:31 GMT speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat spake thus:
> ObAUE: Why is the Salvation Army called the "Sally Anne"? Not in the UK in my experience - it's the "Sally Army" here.
 Signature David =====
Jim Ward - 16 Jan 2004 17:40 GMT > ObAUE: Why is the Salvation Army called the "Sally Anne"? I want to know why the Salvation Army flag has an eight pointed star (seven points not good enough?). Speaking of pledges ...
"I pledge allegiance To the Christian Flag And to the Saviour, For whose Kingdom it stands. One Saviour, crucified, risen and coming again, With life and liberty for all who believe."
Another interesting flag is BVI's, which (according to legend) is always flown with St. Ursula upright to honor her virginity.
http://fotw.vexillum.com/flags/vg.html
Evan Kirshenbaum - 16 Jan 2004 18:42 GMT > > ObAUE: Why is the Salvation Army called the "Sally Anne"? > > I want to know why the Salvation Army flag has an eight pointed star > (seven points not good enough?). According to the organization,
The present star is eight-pointed; the number has been varied from time to time but no significance has ever been attached to this.
http://tinyurl.com/2xvjk <URL:http://www1.salvationarmy.org/heritage.nsf/0/ 2a9e82f8a2e5686e8025696c0032dba7?OpenDocument>
They also note that
Until 1882 the central shape was a sun, but when a plan to open the Army's work in India was put into action it was found that the Parsees, an Indian religious sect regarded the sun as sacred and so it was changed to a star.
So it seems that they were trying to find something that *wasn't* a sacred symbol to anybody. It wouldn't surprise me if you had to get up to eight points before you found a star that fit the bill.
 Signature Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |If you think health care is 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |expensive now, wait until you see Palo Alto, CA 94304 |what it costs when it's free. | P.J. O'Rourke kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com (650)857-7572
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/
R H Draney - 16 Jan 2004 21:57 GMT Evan Kirshenbaum filted:
>So it seems that they were trying to find something that *wasn't* a >sacred symbol to anybody. It wouldn't surprise me if you had to get >up to eight points before you found a star that fit the bill. The Newagers have staked out the nine-pointed one, and I think the Pythagoreans had a soft spot for the one with seventeen....
Incidentally, those of us who played with Spirographs as kids know that it's a solecism to speak of "the" n-pointed star where n>6...there are two heptagrams, one with each point joined to the ones two positions away and one where it leads to the ones at the far side of the star...I've even seen the two forms inscribed one within the othere, though I know not the significance of that....r
Martin Ambuhl - 14 Jan 2004 22:44 GMT > "Before Webster (and his predecessors like > Benjamin Franklin), `center' and `color' were merely variant > spellings. I'm not sure which Dr. Johnson preferred." > > Who's "Dr. Johnson"? Samuel Johnson born 1709, in Lichfield, Staffordshire He studied at Oxford for a year, but dropped out because he couldn't afford it. His doctorates are honorary: Dublin (1765) and Oxford! (1775). After dropping out of Oxford and teaching for a while, he moved to London (1737). His career in London started with cataloging the Earl of Oxford's library and writing for _The Genleman's Magazine_.
He is best known for his dictionary. He wrote the outline for it in 1746, and used that to procure a contract for its production. This was expanded to the _Plan of a Dictionary of the English Language_. He and his assistants worked for three years collecting and filing citations. The first edition appeared in 1754 in a printing of 2000 and a price of 4 pounds, 10 shillings. The second edition was published in weekly sections. There were 165 of these, costing 6p each.
The dictionary, especially in its revised form of 1773, was _the_ dictionary of English for many years.
He also wrote a 10-volume _Lives of the Most Eminent English Poets_ and produced an 8-volume edition of Shakespeare's plays. You have almost certainly heard a reference to Boswell, his biographer.
A CD version of his dictionary is available from the Cambridge University Press, listing for USD 295. The CD has the first edition (1755) and the fourth edition (1773). Each edition has roughly 86,000 entries, 141,000 definitions and 222,000. Chambers traces its dictionaries back to the Johnson dictionary.
There are many definitions well-known for their idiosyncratic definitions. These are much rarer than one would expect from the frequency of their being cited. Here is a more normal example:
E'THER. n. f. [ather, Latin; <in Greek: 'aither'>] 1. An element more fine and subtle than iar; air refined or sublimed. "If any one should suppose that ether, like our air, may contain particles which endeavour to recede from one another; for I do not know what this ether is; and that its particles are exceedingly smaller than those of air, or even than those of light, the exceeding smallness of its particles may contribute to the greatness of the force, by which those particles may recede from one another." Newton's Opt. "The parts of other bodies are held together by the eternal pressure of the ether, and can have no other conceivable cause of their cohesion and union." Locke 2. The matter of the highest regions above. " There fields of light and liquid ether flow, Purg'd from the pond'rous dregs of earth below." Dryden
 Signature Martin Ambuhl
Robert Lieblich - 15 Jan 2004 02:13 GMT > > "Before Webster (and his predecessors like > > Benjamin Franklin), `center' and `color' were merely variant [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > He studied at Oxford for a year, but dropped out because he couldn't afford > it. [snip much else]
Lieblich's Law: No query addressed to AUE is so foolish, inane, or ignorant that it cannot elicit at least one serious answer.
Corollary: There's no way to force the ignoramus to look it up.
 Signature Bob Lieblich Out of patience
DE781 - 15 Jan 2004 02:47 GMT Bob:
>Lieblich's Law: No query addressed to AUE is so foolish, inane, or >ignorant that it cannot elicit at least one serious answer. I am grateful to Martin for his help. And, no, no question is too foolish to not deserve an answer.
>Corollary: There's no way to force the ignoramus to look it up. You'd be proud of me. I've encountered many a vocab word or an English concept during my AUE chronology that I've researched myself without so much as a comment about it typed to the AUE. However, certain obscure things like "Dr. Johnson" or ancient Latin subjunctive tenses cannot be accurately Googled. I'm sure you realize this yourself, Bob. You try Googling "Johnson" and tell me what you find. Given the fact that several AUEers were able to make puns out of the name, involvng everything from window cleaner to dicks, it'd be pretty reasonable that you'd assume Johnson is a common name, even if you didn't know that beforehand.
Robert Lieblich - 15 Jan 2004 03:13 GMT [ ... ]
Bob. You try Googling "Johnson" and tell me
> what you find. You try Googling either "Doctor Johnson" or "Dr. Johnson" and tell me what *you* find.
Gawd.
DE781 - 16 Jan 2004 20:08 GMT >You try Googling either "Doctor Johnson" or "Dr. Johnson" and tell >me what *you* find. > >Gawd. OK, fine! I found *some* websites on him. But, still, how do I know that's the right person? Also, some biographical info isn't gonna explain to me *why* anyone would care what Johnson has to say of *why* they'd compare him to Webster? Webster and OED are famous. What's the big deal about Johnson? Try finding a website that will explain *that*, why don't you!
Mickwick - 18 Jan 2004 01:17 GMT In alt.usage.english, DE781 wrote:
>OK, fine! I found *some* websites on him. But, still, how do I know that's >the right person? Also, some biographical info isn't gonna explain to me *why* >anyone would care what Johnson has to say of *why* they'd compare him to >Webster? Webster and OED are famous. What's the big deal about Johnson? Try >finding a website that will explain *that*, why don't you! The only thing you need to know about Dr Johnson is that he played a big part in the creation of the USA. His 1775 pamphlet_Taxation no Tyranny_ (full text available on the Web) hardened attitudes towards the American colonists and made compromise less likely.
Johnson came to hate Americans even more than he hated Scotsmen but he wasn't always like that and _TNT_ is well worth five minutes of anybody's time. Even yours.
 Signature Mickwick
Security and leisure are the parents of sedition. -S. Johnson
Mike Barnes - 15 Jan 2004 09:39 GMT In alt.usage.english, DE781 wrote:
>Bob: > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >I am grateful to Martin for his help. And, no, no question is too foolish to >not deserve an answer. Huh?
 Signature Mike Barnes Cheshire, England
DE781 - 16 Jan 2004 20:09 GMT Barnes:
>>I am grateful to Martin for his help. And, no, no question is too foolish >to >>not deserve an answer. > >Huh? There is no such thing as a question "too foolish" to deserve an answer.
Mike Barnes - 16 Jan 2004 22:15 GMT In alt.usage.english, DE781 wrote:
>Barnes: > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >There is no such thing as a question "too foolish" to deserve an answer. Did you notice that your rewrite changed "not deserve" to "deserve"?
 Signature Mike Barnes Cheshire, England
DE781 - 17 Jan 2004 17:09 GMT Barnes:
>>>>I am grateful to Martin for his help. And, no, no question is too foolish >>>to [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >Did you notice that your rewrite changed "not deserve" to "deserve"? Huh?
Mike Barnes - 17 Jan 2004 19:47 GMT In alt.usage.english, DE781 wrote:
>Barnes: > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > >Huh? I'll take that as a "no".
 Signature Mike Barnes Cheshire, England
Tony Cooper - 17 Jan 2004 01:18 GMT >Barnes: > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >There is no such thing as a question "too foolish" to deserve an answer. Possibly not, but we admire you for trying.
Richard R. Hershberger - 15 Jan 2004 13:25 GMT > However, certain obscure things like "Dr. > Johnson" or ancient Latin subjunctive tenses cannot be accurately Googled. I'm > sure you realize this yourself, Bob. You try Googling "Johnson" and tell me > what you find. If I thought that "Dr. Johnson" were obscure, I wouldn't admit it in a group devoted to the English language. Such admissions make others wonder about the depth of one's education.
In any case, I googled "Dr. Johnson" and found the third listing (second main listing) devoted to Samuel. Googling on "Doctor Johnson" brings up a site devoted to the good doctor as the first listing.
Richard R. Hershberger
DE781 - 16 Jan 2004 20:12 GMT Richard:
>> However, certain obscure things like "Dr. >> Johnson" or ancient Latin subjunctive tenses cannot be accurately Googled. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >group devoted to the English language. Such admissions make others >wonder about the depth of one's education. Since you even suggested "if I thought X was obscure", that must mean you did. Especially when you're admittedly a phoney. Well, at least YOU and COOPER can admit it, if nobody else can, which makes the two of you SLIGHTLY more real, in a twisted sort of way. Still, you have a ways to go before you're really "REAL"! Unlike me, who is not afraid to admit when I don't know or understand something. Someone wanna question my education? Fine! But we all knows that I'd be the one winning in a contest as long as youse didn't have yo' cheap-a.s Google and online dictionaries and all that other sh.t! Wit'out that sh.t, you'd all be MAD stoooopeeeeed!
Jim Ward - 16 Jan 2004 17:43 GMT > Lieblich's Law: No query addressed to AUE is so foolish, inane, or > ignorant that it cannot elicit at least one serious answer. Speaking of famous Doctors, every time I go to the beach I wonder who Dr. Zogg was.
Tony Cooper - 17 Jan 2004 01:20 GMT >> Lieblich's Law: No query addressed to AUE is so foolish, inane, or >> ignorant that it cannot elicit at least one serious answer. > >Speaking of famous Doctors, every time I go to the beach I wonder >who Dr. Zogg was. And every time I put on my pajamas I wonder who Dr Denton was.
Evan Kirshenbaum - 17 Jan 2004 01:57 GMT > And every time I put on my pajamas I wonder who Dr Denton was. The first guy to implant an artificial heart in a human.
http://www.texasheartinstitute.org/cooley.html
(It's bugging me that I can't track down the actual answer to your question. The trademark was sold to a company called Wormser in 1999, and their site doesn't have anything on the history before that.)
 Signature Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |There are just two rules of 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |governance in a free society: Mind Palo Alto, CA 94304 |your own business. Keep your hands |to yourself. kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com | P.J. O'Rourke (650)857-7572
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/
Tony Cooper - 17 Jan 2004 03:02 GMT >> And every time I put on my pajamas I wonder who Dr Denton was. > >The first guy to implant an artificial heart in a human. > > http://www.texasheartinstitute.org/cooley.html I've met Dr Cooley several times. He developed some surgical instruments that a company that I worked for made for him. Very charismatic guy.
>(It's bugging me that I can't track down the actual answer to your >question. The trademark was sold to a company called Wormser in 1999, >and their site doesn't have anything on the history before that.) Don't get in a flap over it.
mUs1Ka - 17 Jan 2004 13:07 GMT >>> And every time I put on my pajamas I wonder who Dr Denton was. >> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Don't get in a flap over it. Ah. *Those* kind of pyjamas. m.
Jim Ward - 17 Jan 2004 17:16 GMT >>Speaking of famous Doctors, every time I go to the beach I wonder >>who Dr. Zogg was.
> And every time I put on my pajamas I wonder who Dr Denton was. Not being a surfer, I've always been curious as to the purpose of surf wax. Is it to make your board slicker so that there's less water resistance?
Michael Nitabach - 17 Jan 2004 17:22 GMT > Not being a surfer, I've always been curious as to the purpose of > surf wax. Is it to make your board slicker so that there's less > water resistance? I'm not a surfer either, but it is my understanding that surf wax is applied to the top of the board to make it stickier so your feet don't slip.
 Signature Mike Nitabach
Joe Fineman - 15 Jan 2004 21:11 GMT > "Before Webster (and his predecessors like > Benjamin Franklin), `center' and `color' were merely variant > spellings. I'm not sure which Dr. Johnson preferred." > > Who's "Dr. Johnson"? Samuel Johnson, I presume.
His dictionary (1755) has "centre" & "colour".
 Signature --- Joe Fineman jcf@TheWorld.com
||: Most of the evil in the world comes from nature, and most :|| ||: of the ugliness comes from art. :|| DE781 - 14 Jan 2004 22:31 GMT "Or "The cars were red, blue, green and blue, orange and white and grey" (Period omitted - I'll take the `5th')"
I get the example on what the commas do. But why's the period omitted and what's "taking the 5th" have to do with any of it?
DE781 - 14 Jan 2004 22:34 GMT "Or "The cars were red, blue, green and blue, orange and white and grey" (Period omitted - I'll take the `5th')
Sure it parses but it doesn't scan commas are pauses dashes and semicolons are too.
We don't spell the way we speak, shouldn't we at least punctuate phonetically."
OK. I just read the rest of the person's post. What does she mean by "it parses but it doesn't scan"? I'm guessing she used no punctuation to illustrate a point?
DE781 - 14 Jan 2004 22:42 GMT Fontana will be happy to know that the AUE had its first pronunciation thread in its first day, May 13, 1991. So, Fontana, when people diss you for wanning to discuss the way words are said, tell them all to respect their elders.
"Message 1 in thread From: karl.kleinpaste@osc.edu (karl.kleinpaste@osc.edu) Subject: Verbal usage View this article only Newsgroups: alt.usage.english Date: 1991-05-13 00:12:41 PST
As long as we're at it, we need not confine ourselves to questions of written (hm, typed, displayed) English. One could start by asking how many know how to pronounce the name of the language. Far too many people have the fairly twisted idea that they speak Inglish; personally, I speak English, where the `E' is pronounced the way it is heard in "Engineering" and "Entertainment."
pedantically, --karl
PS- Excessively serious followups will be taken as conclusive evidence of the need for a Real Life(tm), regardless of the fact that I'm really quite serious about the subject matter..."
Ben Zimmer - 15 Jan 2004 00:26 GMT > From: karl.kleinpaste@osc.edu (karl.kleinpaste@osc.edu) > Subject: Verbal usage [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > personally, I speak English, where the `E' is pronounced the way it is > heard in "Engineering" and "Entertainment." Had this been posted nowadays, it would no doubt have provoked a blizzard of "Oy!"s.
For those curious about the history of the "twisted idea" of pronouncing <English> as /'INglIS/, see the recent sci.lang thread on "Inglish" <http://groups.google.com/groups?th=ecb9729fa45715cf>, to which I contributed:
Here's OED's etymological note for _England_:
This word and its cognates, _English_, etc. are the only instances in which in mod. standard English the letter _e_ stands in an accented syllable for /I/. The change of an earlier /EN/ into /IN/ is strictly normal, and in all other examples the spelling has followed the pronunciation. Cf. _wing_, ME. _wenge_; _string_, OE. _strenge_; _link_, OE. _hlence_.
So the change to /'INglIS/ and /'INgl@nd/ was not particularly unusual-- it's just that the spelling of <English> and <England> remained conservative for some reason, while the spelling of <wing>, <string>, etc. reflected the new pronunciation with /IN/.
Bob Cunningham - 15 Jan 2004 01:20 GMT [ . . . ]
> So the change to /'INglIS/ and /'INgl@nd/ was not particularly > unusual-- it's just that the spelling of <English> and <England> > remained conservative for some reason, while the spelling of > <wing>, <string>, etc. reflected the new pronunciation with /IN/. I say ['i:NglIS], ['i:Ngl@nd], [wi:N], and [stri:N] ("eenglish", "eengland", "weeng", and "streeng"), and I believe a lot of other people do too. But I know that some people who use [I] in those words will swear that I'm using [I] when I pronounce them, and when they pronounce them supposedly with [I], I will clearly hear them pronouncing them with [i:].
Ross Howard - 15 Jan 2004 01:24 GMT >[ . . . ] > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >they pronounce them supposedly with [I], I will clearly hear >them pronouncing them with [i:]. Isn't it actually more [i] (i.e. the Spanish/Italian "i" ) than [i:]? Do you really use exactly the same vowels as in "weakling"?
-- Ross Howard
DE781 - 15 Jan 2004 02:22 GMT Ross:
>Do you really use exactly the same vowels as in "weakling"? I use two different vowels in "weakling". The first one is the true long "E" (the Spanish/Italian "I", como te lo chiama); but the second is the short "I".
DE781 - 15 Jan 2004 02:32 GMT In the subjunctive discussion from 5/13/91, someone said the following:
"As I mentioned in another posting, the subjunctive in Latin absorbed other, older moods like the optative and jussive, so if we are going to talk about the subjunctive in English because Latin has a subjunctive, shouldn't we be more specific and discuss the optative, jussive, etc.?
What about the instrumental and ablative cases, while we're at it, or the middle voice?"
I agree with him that our subjunctive--*if* it were indistiguishable from the indicative, which I don't believe it is, even 13 years later--would not be worth caring about. Still, what he says about those other tenses and whatnot sounds interesting. What are the opative, jussive, ablative, etc? How come youse 2004 peeps don't mention such cool stuff anymore?
Sorry if this is a one-liner or whatever Liebs accuses me of doing that's Bun-ish. I'd like to learn some sh.t, and, hopefully, stimulate discussion in the process.
Pat Durkin - 15 Jan 2004 03:19 GMT > In the subjunctive discussion from 5/13/91, someone said the following: > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > Bun-ish. I'd like to learn some sh.t, and, hopefully, stimulate discussion in > the process. Call it entropy.
We are none of us as young as we once were, but some of us are in the expanding phase, and some of us are not.
Still, Joey, you might ask us your own questions, get our answers, get to understand them, and save your research for your own private study.
DE781 - 16 Jan 2004 20:13 GMT Durkin:
>Still, Joey, you might ask us your own questions, get our answers, get to >understand them, and save your research for your own private study. I don't get it. Isn't that what I'm doing?
Pat Durkin - 16 Jan 2004 23:50 GMT > Durkin: > > >Still, Joey, you might ask us your own questions, get our answers, get to > >understand them, and save your research for your own private study. > > I don't get it. Isn't that what I'm doing? No, Joey.
You didn't include any part of your previous message, but it was snippets from questions asked and answered in the early days of this newsgroup.
Archives are there for those who care to read them, and you and other researchers can conduct further inquiries by private email.
DE781 - 17 Jan 2004 17:08 GMT Durkin:
>Archives are there for those who care to read them, and you and other >researchers can conduct further inquiries by private email. No. You don't understand what I was doing. I posted the posts just for *reference*. Then, I added my own question at the end, about what made that 1991 joke a joke.
Bob Cunningham - 15 Jan 2004 05:43 GMT > >[ . . . ]
> >> So the change to /'INglIS/ and /'INgl@nd/ was not particularly > >> unusual-- it's just that the spelling of <English> and <England> > >> remained conservative for some reason, while the spelling of > >> <wing>, <string>, etc. reflected the new pronunciation with /IN/.
> >I say ['i:NglIS], ['i:Ngl@nd], [wi:N], and [stri:N] > >("eenglish", "eengland", "weeng", and "streeng"), and I > >believe a lot of other people do too.
> >But I know that some people who use [I] in those words will > >swear that I'm using [I] when I pronounce them, and when > >they pronounce them supposedly with [I], I will clearly hear > >them pronouncing them with [i:].
> Isn't it actually more [i] (i.e. the Spanish/Italian "i" ) than [i:]? > Do you really use exactly the same vowels as in "weakling"? I suppose it could be [i], but when I say "English" or "sing" I feel like I'm using the same vowel as in "eeny" and "seen".
You can hear for yourself in two sound files at http://www.exw6sxq.com/sparky/aue_related/speech_examples/win_and_wing.html . I would appreciate any opinions regarding what vowels I'm using in those files.
R J Valentine - 15 Jan 2004 07:20 GMT } On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 02:24:12 +0100, Ross Howard } <gguiri@yahoo.com> said: } }> On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 01:20:49 GMT, Bob Cunningham }> <exw6sxq@earthlink.net> wrought: }> }> >On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 19:26:02 -0500, Ben Zimmer }> ><bgzimmer@midway.uchicago.edu> said: } }> >[ . . . ] } }> >> So the change to /'INglIS/ and /'INgl@nd/ was not particularly }> >> unusual-- it's just that the spelling of <English> and <England> }> >> remained conservative for some reason, while the spelling of }> >> <wing>, <string>, etc. reflected the new pronunciation with /IN/. } }> >I say ['i:NglIS], ['i:Ngl@nd], [wi:N], and [stri:N] }> >("eenglish", "eengland", "weeng", and "streeng"), and I }> >believe a lot of other people do too. } }> >But I know that some people who use [I] in those words will }> >swear that I'm using [I] when I pronounce them, and when }> >they pronounce them supposedly with [I], I will clearly hear }> >them pronouncing them with [i:]. } }> Isn't it actually more [i] (i.e. the Spanish/Italian "i" ) than [i:]? }> Do you really use exactly the same vowels as in "weakling"? } } I suppose it could be [i], but when I say "English" or } "sing" I feel like I'm using the same vowel as in "eeny" and } "seen". } } You can hear for yourself in two sound files at } http://www.exw6sxq.com/sparky/aue_related/speech_examples/win_and_wing.html } . I would appreciate any opinions regarding what vowels I'm } using in those files.
_Any_ opinions? Okay. At first listen, I agree that your "English" and "sing" vowels are on the [i] side of [I] to the point that I wouldn't disagree if you called them [i], rather than [I], because they are distinctly different from the [I] you use in "win". I don't think they're protracted enough that *I* would call them [i:], and they don't strike me to be what you might hypothetically might do with (or to) "seeng", which might well be [i:].
I similarly sort of agree with what I think you are saying elsewhere about "ang" and "ank" sounds in relation to "cat" sounds. I don't recall your "can a cat man" "man" sound to compare that one just now.
 Signature R. J. Valentine <mailto:rj@smart.net>
Michael J Hardy - 15 Jan 2004 23:53 GMT > I suppose it could be [i], but when I say "English" or > "sing" I feel like I'm using the same vowel as in "eeny" and > "seen". Could it be that you're a Californian? I think a lot of those say "workeen" instead of "working", etc. -- Mike Hardy
Bob Cunningham - 16 Jan 2004 00:19 GMT
> > I suppose it could be [i], but when I say "English" or > > "sing" I feel like I'm using the same vowel as in "eeny" and > > "seen".
> Could it be that you're a Californian? I think a lot > of those say "workeen" instead of "working", etc. -- Mike Hardy I've been a Southern Californian for the past sixty years or so.
And I do say "working".
Every English speaker in the world -- not excepting non-native speakers -- says "working".
I suppose you say "working", but it's possible you pronounce it differently from the way I do.
Michael J Hardy - 16 Jan 2004 00:43 GMT > Every English speaker in the world -- not excepting > non-native speakers -- says "working". Not so. My wife, a former southern Californian, says "workeen". She is capable of saying "working", but only with conspicuous effort. And a transplant from the Midwest who has lived for a couple of decades in northern California tells me he hears that there as well. He mentioned this without having heard anything from me about this; it's quite independent of my own observation. -- Mike Hardy
PS: It is surprising to hear someone say that some pronunciation is used universally throughout the English-speaking world.
DE781 - 15 Jan 2004 01:39 GMT Cunningham:
>I say ['i:NglIS], ['i:Ngl@nd], [wi:N], and [stri:N] >("eenglish", "eengland", "weeng", and "streeng"), and I >believe a lot of other people do too. So, you're talking the difference bewteen a long "E" and a short "I" then. All those vowel sounds that you seem to use the long "E" for, I use the short "I". The '91 poster, apparently, used the short "E", in an attempt at "correctness".
Aaron J. Dinkin - 15 Jan 2004 03:33 GMT > I say ['i:NglIS], ['i:Ngl@nd], [wi:N], and [stri:N] > ("eenglish", "eengland", "weeng", and "streeng"), and I [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > they pronounce them supposedly with [I], I will clearly hear > them pronouncing them with [i:]. I know that I can't tell the difference (by ear, anyway) between [IN] and [iN]. This is all because, as far as I know, no dialect of English differentiates between /i/ and /I/ before /N/. You clearly interpret your front high vowel before /N/ as /i/; I, out of habit, interpret mine as /I/, but I sure couldn't tell you whether it's actually [I] or [i].
(Not just out of habit, actually: /I/ also fits the pattern better, as my dialect allows /A./, /E/, and /V/ - canonical short vowels - before /N/, but not canonical long vowels like /u/, /o/, or the diphthongs. This makes it more reasonable, I think, to assign the ambiguous cases to the short-vowel phonemes /I/ and /&/, rather than the long-vowel phonemes /i/ and /e/ that they also resemble.)
-Aaron J. Dinkin Dr. Whom
Ben Zimmer - 15 Jan 2004 04:24 GMT > > I say ['i:NglIS], ['i:Ngl@nd], [wi:N], and [stri:N] > > ("eenglish", "eengland", "weeng", and "streeng"), and I [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > dialect allows /A./, /E/, and /V/ - canonical short vowels - before /N/, > but not canonical long vowels like /u/, /o/, or the diphthongs. Wot, no "oink", "boink", "boing", or "Oingo Boingo"?
That diphthong has a high front offglide, so it doesn't undermine your case.
Aaron J. Dinkin - 15 Jan 2004 06:47 GMT >> (Not just out of habit, actually: /I/ also fits the pattern better, as my >> dialect allows /A./, /E/, and /V/ - canonical short vowels - before /N/, >> but not canonical long vowels like /u/, /o/, or the diphthongs. > > Wot, no "oink", "boink", "boing", or "Oingo Boingo"? Good counterexample. I suppose the "oi" diphthong isn't one of the canonical long vowels (/ai/ is, and arguably /au/ could be as well), but it seems like it ought to pattern with them. Then again, /U/ doesn't pattern with the canonical short vowels in many respects (though it does in some respects), so perhaps there is justification for distinguishing the "canonical" vowels as a class.
> That diphthong has a high front offglide, so it doesn't undermine your > case. I don't quite see what you mean. /ai/ has a high front offglide as well.
-Aaron J. Dinkin Dr. Whom
J. W. Love - 15 Jan 2004 04:41 GMT Aaron wrote:
>I know that I can't tell the difference (by ear, anyway) >between [IN] and [iN]. Have you listened to CNN's Aaron Brown? He seems to use something close to the [iN] form.
Bob Cunningham - 15 Jan 2004 06:05 GMT > > I say ['i:NglIS], ['i:Ngl@nd], [wi:N], and [stri:N] > > ("eenglish", "eengland", "weeng", and "streeng"), and I > > believe a lot of other people do too.
> > But I know that some people who use [I] in those words will > > swear that I'm using [I] when I pronounce them, and when > > they pronounce them supposedly with [I], I will clearly hear > > them pronouncing them with [i:].
> I know that I can't tell the difference (by ear, anyway) between [IN] and > [iN]. This is all because, as far as I know, no dialect of English > differentiates between /i/ and /I/ before /N/. You clearly interpret your > front high vowel before /N/ as /i/; I, out of habit, interpret mine as > /I/, but I sure couldn't tell you whether it's actually [I] or [i].
> (Not just out of habit, actually: /I/ also fits the pattern better, as my > dialect allows /A./, /E/, and /V/ - canonical short vowels - before /N/, > but not canonical long vowels like /u/, /o/, or the diphthongs. This makes > it more reasonable, I think, to assign the ambiguous cases to the > short-vowel phonemes /I/ and /&/, rather than the long-vowel phonemes /i/ > and /e/ that they also resemble.) When I try to pronounce [IN], [&N], or {EN], it seems difficult and unnatural. But [A:N] (as in "wrong") and [VN] (as in "hung") are no problem. I can't think at the moment of any English words that have [aIN], [oUN], or [u:N] but I don't find them unnatural to pronounce. I think I use [eIN] in "angle" and [i:N] in "sing".
I don't see any short-vowel-long-vowel pattern there.
Some people may want to listen to my rendition of "The rain in Spain falls mainly at an angle on the ankles of the angels on the plain" at http://www.exw6sxq.com/sparky/aue_related/speech_examples/rain_in_spain.wav . Also "We sing if we bring in a win" and "In England we sing things in English" at http://www.exw6sxq.com/sparky/aue_related/speech_examples/win_and_wing.html . `
Aaron J. Dinkin - 15 Jan 2004 06:57 GMT > When I try to pronounce [IN], [&N], or {EN], it seems > difficult and unnatural. But [A:N] (as in "wrong") and [VN] > (as in "hung") are no problem. I find [&N] unnatural to pronounce as well, but no more so than I find [&n] or [&m]. When I've got /&/ before /N/, I think it comes out as something a lot higher than [&], maybe even [e]. I analyze this as /&/ rather than /e/ for the reasons detailed in my previous posting.
No [EN]? How do you pronounce "strength"? (I have different vowels in "strength" and, for instance, "ankle".)
As I've already mentioned, I can't say whether I've got [IN] or not.
> I can't think at the moment of any English words that have [aIN], > [oUN], or [u:N] but I don't find them unnatural to pronounce. I think > I use [eIN] in "angle" and [i:N] in "sing". > > I don't see any short-vowel-long-vowel pattern there. Fair enough. It looks like your dialect has a significantly different pattern of what can go before /N/ than mine does. That's perfectly legitimate. Mine is restricted (mostly) to canonical short vowels; yours seems to be more complicated. It seems to be similar to (though not the same as) the set of vowels allowed before /r/.
> Some people may want to listen to my rendition of "The rain > in Spain falls mainly at an angle on the ankles of the [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > http://www.exw6sxq.com/sparky/aue_related/speech_examples/win_and_wing.html > . ` Your "ang" vowels in "ankle" and "angle" sound lower than [eIN] to me, and lower than I think I would pronounce them - perhaps even as far down as [&N]. Your "ing" vowels do sound higher than your "in" vowels, so I'm willing to accept your description of them as [iN] rather than [IN].
I still don't have Praat, or anything that can tell me about formants, on my home computer, so I can't analyze your sentences with more than my ear; but I'm taking Phonetics this semester so that'll probably change.
-Aaron J. Dinkin Dr. Whom
Bob Cunningham - 15 Jan 2004 07:22 GMT [ . . . ]
> I still don't have Praat, or anything that can tell me about formants, on > my home computer, so I can't analyze your sentences with more than my > ear; but I'm taking Phonetics this semester so that'll probably change. I exchanged some e-mails with Professor Ladefoged a year or three ago. He said they had Praat, but it was "languishing on the shelf". He told me about a software package that he had and that he liked a lot more. (Unlike Praat, it wasn't free.) I'll see if I can dig up the message.
I would think that your university should have a phonetics-analysis package that would be available to faculty and students.
Anyway, it will be good to know that someone else in AUE is doing formant analysis. I've long wished for someone to compare results with.
Jonathan Jordan - 15 Jan 2004 20:39 GMT <snip>
> When I try to pronounce [IN], [&N], or {EN], it seems > difficult and unnatural. But [A:N] (as in "wrong") and [VN] [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > in Spain falls mainly at an angle on the ankles of the > angels on the plain" at http://www.exw6sxq.com/sparky/aue_related/speech_examples/rain_in_spain.wav
> . Also "We sing if we bring in a win" and "In England we > sing things in English" at http://www.exw6sxq.com/sparky/aue_related/speech_examples/win_and_wing.html
> . ` To me, your "ankle" and "angle" sound higher than the vowels I would use in those words, but I don't think they're high enough to be [e], nor do I hear an [I] glide.
Your vowel in "wing" etc. is probably slightly more towards [i] than mine, but the most striking thing to me in that recording was that your "win" vowel sounded diphthongal - something like [I@].
Jonathan
Bob Cunningham - 17 Jan 2004 22:49 GMT [ . . . ]
> To me, your "ankle" and "angle" sound higher than the vowels I would use in > those words, but I don't think they're high enough to be [e], nor do I hear > an [I] glide. Yes, I think Skitt commented on that a few months ago. I had thought my vowels in "rain" and "ankle" were the same, but after reading his comments I listened again and realized they weren't.
> Your vowel in "wing" etc. is probably slightly more towards [i] than mine, > but the most striking thing to me in that recording was that your "win" > vowel sounded diphthongal - something like [I@]. Vowel glide varies greatly depending upon what consonant follows. I think this is what Professor Ladefoged calls anticipatory coarticulation.
I've done formant analysis of the string "hib hid hif hig hij hik hil him hin hip hir his hit hiv hiz" to show the way glide depends upon the following consonant. You can see the results at http://tinyurl.com/2dou3 or http://www.exw6sxq.com/sparky/aue_related/formants/hib_thru_hiz.html . `
Richard Maurer - 18 Jan 2004 01:52 GMT The phrase of the day comes from the above article.
"anticipatory coarticulation"
-- --------------------------------------------- Richard Maurer To reply, remove half Sunnyvale, California of a homonym of a synonym for also. ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jonathan Jordan - 15 Jan 2004 12:32 GMT > > I say ['i:NglIS], ['i:Ngl@nd], [wi:N], and [stri:N] > > ("eenglish", "eengland", "weeng", and "streeng"), and I [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > front high vowel before /N/ as /i/; I, out of habit, interpret mine as > /I/, but I sure couldn't tell you whether it's actually [I] or [i]. I also interpret mine as /I/, but I can feel a difference - it feels higher and fronter. The same is true for /I/ before /g/, and for /E/ before both /N/ and /g/. The vowels of "egg" and "vague" are still different, but they don't feel as different as those of "bet" and "bait".
> (Not just out of habit, actually: /I/ also fits the pattern better, as my > dialect allows /A./, /E/, and /V/ - canonical short vowels - before /N/, > but not canonical long vowels like /u/, /o/, or the diphthongs. This makes > it more reasonable, I think, to assign the ambiguous cases to the > short-vowel phonemes /I/ and /&/, rather than the long-vowel phonemes /i/ > and /e/ that they also resemble.) I have /N/ after the short vowels (but not /U/) and /OI/ e.g. "bang", "strength", "sing", "long", "hung", "boing". My "long" has /A./ ("cot"), not /O/ ("caught").
Jonathan
Michael J Hardy - 15 Jan 2004 23:52 GMT > I know that I can't tell the difference (by ear, anyway) between [IN] and > [iN]. This is all because, as far as I know, no dialect of English > differentiates between /i/ and /I/ before /N/. You gotta be kidding. "Tin" and "teen" are pronounced quite differently from each other, and the difference is exactly that between "bit" and "beat". (Smaller then the difference between "tin" and "ten", I think, but just barely.) If I heard someone say "teen" when they meant "tin", I would find it jarringly conspicuous. -- Mike Hardy
Evan Kirshenbaum - 16 Jan 2004 00:12 GMT > > I know that I can't tell the difference (by ear, anyway) between > > [IN] and [iN]. This is all because, as far as I know, no dialect [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > quite differently from each other, and the difference is exactly > that between "bit" and "beat". Aaron said "before /N/", not "before /n/". /N/ is the sound typically written "ng".
I think that I can tell the difference between [IN] and [iN], but [iN] sounds "foreign", and it's the sound I would use in, say, a fake Mexican accent. In words like "seeing", I have the two next to one another: /siIN/, and there's a distinct difference. (There doesn't appear to be any appreciable glide between them.)
 Signature Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |When all else fails, give the 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |customer what they ask for. This Palo Alto, CA 94304 |is strong medicine and rarely needs |to be repeated. kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com (650)857-7572
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/
Michael J Hardy - 16 Jan 2004 00:37 GMT > > You gotta be kidding. "Tin" and "teen" are pronounced > > quite differently from each other, and the difference is exactly > > that between "bit" and "beat". > > Aaron said "before /N/", not "before /n/". /N/ is the sound typically > written "ng". Oh. I knew that, but I'm less than fluent in ASCIIIPA.
Maybe Aaron's right, but I am still inclinded to think of these as different sounds.
BTW, long before I ever suspected that some people pronounce "ten" like "tin" I mentioned to someone the obvious fact that the pronunciation of "English" and "England" is an exception, in that people pronounce it as if it were spelled "Inglish" and "Ingland". I was surprised that he could not understand what I was talking about. By hindsight I suspect he was one of those. -- Mike Hardy
R F - 16 Jan 2004 00:27 GMT > > I know that I can't tell the difference (by ear, anyway) between [IN] and > > [iN]. This is all because, as far as I know, no dialect of English [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > someone say "teen" when they meant "tin", I would find it > jarringly conspicuous. -- Mike Hardy [N] is KirshASCIIIPA for the final consonant of "thing" (in most English dialects, anyway [I presume]), not the final consonant of "thin".
I am well aware of there being numerous AmE accents that sound to me like they use a more [i]-like vowel in "ing" than sounds "normal" to me. I'm guessing that this is a Western dialect thing (or "theeng"). The Western part explains Bob Cunningham's wanting to use [i] to represent his pronunciation. Bob is nothing if not a Western American speaker par excellence.
I think I've heard something that might be related in certain Midland accents, but not necessarily for /I/ before /N/. I know one (Midland-region) Hoosier who says "get 'im" as what sounds to me like "get eem". I think I've heard something like this in Western Pennsylvania accents too.
I'm reminded of those Midland speakers who say "measure" like "may-zher", not to mention the egg-rhymes-with-vague crowd. Needless to say, it doesn't happen in Postwar New York Prestige Standard (The American RP of the Twenty-first Century [TM]).
Bob Cunningham - 16 Jan 2004 01:04 GMT [ . . . ]
> I think I've heard something that might be related in certain Midland > accents, but not necessarily for /I/ before /N/. I know one > (Midland-region) Hoosier who says "get 'im" as what sounds to me like > "get eem". I think that's the normal pronunciation in Postwar Northern Utah Prestige Standard. Anyway, it's the way I think I say it. I also pronounce the "ish" in "English" [iS] (roughly, "eesh").
R J Valentine - 16 Jan 2004 04:30 GMT } On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 19:27:43 -0500, R F } <rfontana@alumni.wesleyan.edu> said: } } [ . . . ] } }> I think I've heard something that might be related in certain Midland }> accents, but not necessarily for /I/ before /N/. I know one }> (Midland-region) Hoosier who says "get 'im" as what sounds to me like }> "get eem". } } I think that's the normal pronunciation in Postwar Northern } Utah Prestige Standard. Anyway, it's the way I think I say } it. I also pronounce the "ish" in "English" [iS] (roughly, } "eesh").
I don't know about your "him", but I happened to have a sample of your "English" handy, and it strikes me as a solid ['iNglIS]. That's not to say you don't pronounce it with an [iS] (roughly, "eesh") at other times, but this one was a rock solid KAI [IS] (roughly, "ish"), at a spot where I wouldn't be too surprised if someone popped an [@S].
 Signature R. J. Valentine <mailto:rj@smart.net> (who's sorry to appear to disagree when he so often agrees)
DE781 - 16 Jan 2004 02:18 GMT Hardy:
>You gotta be kidding. "Tin" and "teen" are pronounced >quite differently from each other, and the difference is exactly >that between "bit" and "beat". (Smaller then the difference >between "tin" and "ten", I think, but just barely.) If I heard >someone say "teen" when they meant "tin", I would find it >jarringly conspicuous. -- Mike Hardy Did you people *never* learn short and long vowel sounds? "Tin" is short "I"; "teen" is long "I". Ten is short "E".
R J Valentine - 16 Jan 2004 04:33 GMT } Hardy: } }>You gotta be kidding. "Tin" and "teen" are pronounced }>quite differently from each other, and the difference is exactly }>that between "bit" and "beat". (Smaller then the difference }>between "tin" and "ten", I think, but just barely.) If I heard }>someone say "teen" when they meant "tin", I would find it }>jarringly conspicuous. -- Mike Hardy } } Did you people *never* learn short and long vowel sounds? "Tin" is short "I"; } "teen" is long "I".
Oy!
} Ten is short "E".
How about "Tet" and "Ted"? Are they both short e's?
 Signature R. J. Valentine <mailto:rj@smart.net>
DE781 - 16 Jan 2004 20:54 GMT Valentine:
>Oy! > >} Ten is short "E". > >How about "Tet" and "Ted"? Are they both short e's? Of course. It ain't my fault that youse are dumb.
R J Valentine - 17 Jan 2004 05:39 GMT [but not before snipping that what was Oy!ed, which was his:]
Did you people *never* learn short and long vowel sounds? "Tin" is short "I"; "teen" is long "I".
} Valentine: } }> }>Oy!
The "Oy!" stands.
}>} Ten is short "E". }> }>How about "Tet" and "Ted"? Are they both short e's? } } Of course. It ain't my fault that youse are dumb.
Have you noticed that they're not the same length?
-- R. J. Valentine <mailto:rj@smart.net>
Alan Jones - 16 Jan 2004 15:59 GMT > Hardy: > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Did you people *never* learn short and long vowel sounds? "Tin" is short "I"; > "teen" is long "I". Ten is short "E". No. The "I" sounds are different in quality, not simply length, as you can confirm by trying to elongate the "tin" sound without changing the quality of the sound: the result won't be "teen" (or at least it isn't for me). Or you can try saying "sheet" and "sheep" quickly: they won't magically turn into "sh.t" and "ship". That's why the IPA/ASCII system has separate symbols: [i] or elongated to [i:] for the "teen" sound, [I] for the "tin" sound.
People whose own languages don't have [I] and [i] as a minimal pair find the sheet/sh.t sheep/ship distinction in English very hard to recognise and imitate, which can lead to amusement on one side and embarrassment on the other.
If "ten" has a "short E", what would be an example of a "long E"? If you simply lengthen the vowel of "ten", you'll get (in my RP version of BrE) approximately the vowel of "air" -- but only approximately: the sound of "air", even in the non-rhotic RP BrE, is more complicated that that.
Alan Jones
DE781 - 16 Jan 2004 21:01 GMT Jones:
Hmmm...maybe you people aren't dumb. Maybe you just never learned the vowel sounds in terms of "long" and "short". "Long" and "short" has *nothing* to do with the actual length of the vowels. It just means that each English vowel has, in general, two different sounds.
>> Did you people *never* learn short and long vowel sounds? "Tin" is short >"I"; >> "teen" is long "I". Ten is short "E". What I said here holds, except that I made a mistake. "Teen" is long "*E*", not long "I". Long "I" would be the sound *I*, just as long "E" is the sound *E*, long "A" is the *A* sound, etc. Long "U" can be either the *U* sound or the "oo".
>Or >you can try saying "sheet" and "sheep" quickly: they won't magically turn >into "sh.t" and "ship". Although there is *another* way of turning sheep into sh.t.
> which can lead to amusement on one side and embarrassment on the >other. LOL! Yup! Oddly enough, I remember an Asian back who used to work at my town's post office back in the day. I was there, with my parents, odering "sheets" of stamps, when the sheet-stamps first made their debut. The poor guy asked, "how many 'sh.ts' do you want?", and I couldn't help but laugh out loud.
>If "ten" has a "short E", what would be an example of a "long E"? The long "E" is the "beat"/"teen" vowel sound; when I called that the long "I", as above, that was an error.
Evan Kirshenbaum - 16 Jan 2004 21:21 GMT > Jones: > > Hmmm...maybe you people aren't dumb. Maybe you just never learned > the vowel sounds in terms of "long" and "short". "Long" and "short" > has *nothing* to do with the actual length of the vowels. It just > means that each English vowel has, in general, two different sounds. You might notice that he's posting from the UK. Evidently the notion of "long" and "short" as the names for the contrast is pretty much limited to the US. (I don't know about Canada.)
Phonetically, of course, the only place most of us in the US have a length contrast is in pairs like "cap" and "cab", where the only phonetic difference is that the vowel in the second is longer.
For non-Americans, our canonical vowels are
long A bait short A bat long E beat short E bet long I bite short I bit long O boat short O bot long U butte short U but
(I was also taught that "a long vowel says it's own name") and for some,
long OO boot short OO book
The distinction is signalled in writing by a macron for long vowels and a breve for short vowels.
the other vowels are pedagogically
AW bought OY boil OW bout
 Signature Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |It is error alone which needs the 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |support of government. Truth can Palo Alto, CA 94304 |stand by itself. | Thomas Jefferson kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com (650)857-7572
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/
R H Draney - 16 Jan 2004 22:02 GMT Evan Kirshenbaum filted:
>(I was also taught that "a long vowel says it's own name") Oy! to whoever taught that....r
R F - 16 Jan 2004 23:20 GMT > Phonetically, of course, the only place most of us in the US have a > length contrast is in pairs like "cap" and "cab", where the only > phonetic difference is that the vowel in the second is longer. That may be true of "most of us in the US", but New York region speakers, probably including Young Joey, have a difference in the quality of the vowel ("cap" has the "be able can" lax can vowel, while "cab" has the "tin can" tense can vowel). This is a phonemic difference too (because of "can").
Evan Kirshenbaum - 16 Jan 2004 23:44 GMT > > Phonetically, of course, the only place most of us in the US have a > > length contrast is in pairs like "cap" and "cab", where the only [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > while "cab" has the "tin can" tense can vowel). This is a phonemic > difference too (because of "can"). Fair point. How about the other (typically) length-determined pairs:
bait : bade bat : bad beat : bead bet : bed bite : bide bit : bid boat : bode bot : bod cute : cued but : bud boot : booed foot : food
bought : baud lout : loud
(I can't seem to think of one with /OI/.)
 Signature Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |The General Theorem of Usenet 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |Information: If you really want to Palo Alto, CA 94304 |know the definitive answer, post |the wrong information, and wait for kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com |someone to come by and explain in (650)857-7572 |excruciating detail precisely how |wrong you are. http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ | Eric The Read
Jonathan Jordan - 17 Jan 2004 17:38 GMT > > > Phonetically, of course, the only place most of us in the US have a > > > length contrast is in pairs like "cap" and "cab", where the only [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > boat : bode bot : bod > cute : cued but : bud On the other side of the Atlantic, I can feel a length difference in the pairs on the left, but it's much less noticeable on the pairs on the right. So "bit", "bid" and "beat" are all about the same length, but "bead" is longer.
> boot : booed foot : food You have the same vowel phoneme in "foot" as in "food"? I have /U/ in "foot" but /u/ in "food".
Jonathan
Evan Kirshenbaum - 17 Jan 2004 20:28 GMT > "Evan Kirshenbaum" <kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com> wrote in message > > boot : booed foot : food > > You have the same vowel phoneme in "foot" as in "food"? I have /U/ in > "foot" but /u/ in "food". No. I'm like you. I have no idea why I wrote that. Let's see if I can find a minimal pair. No, I don't think I can.
 Signature Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |It does me no injury for my neighbor 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |to say there are twenty gods, or no Palo Alto, CA 94304 |God. | Thomas Jefferson kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com (650)857-7572
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/
Aaron J. Dinkin - 20 Jan 2004 20:47 GMT >> "Evan Kirshenbaum" <kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com> wrote in message >> > boot : booed foot : food [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > No. I'm like you. I have no idea why I wrote that. Let's see if I > can find a minimal pair. No, I don't think I can. "Hood"/"who'd"?
-Aaron J. Dinkin Dr. Whom
Ben Zimmer - 20 Jan 2004 21:39 GMT > >> "Evan Kirshenbaum" <kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com> wrote in message > >> > boot : booed foot : food [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > "Hood"/"who'd"? I believe Evan was looking for a minimal pair with /-Ut/ and /-Ud/. Both combinations are somewhat rare in English, however:
/-Ut/: put, foot, soot, root (in some AmE dialects) /-Ud/: good, hood, stood, could, should, would/wood
Evan Kirshenbaum - 20 Jan 2004 21:53 GMT > > > No. I'm like you. I have no idea why I wrote that. Let's see > > > if I can find a minimal pair. No, I don't think I can. > > > > "Hood"/"who'd"? > > I believe Evan was looking for a minimal pair with /-Ut/ and /-Ud/. Right. Or with any other pair of homorganic voiceless and voiced consonants.
After thinking a while, I finally found "nookie" and "noogie", which work for me.
 Signature Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |It is a popular delusion that the 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |government wastes vast amounts of Palo Alto, CA 94304 |money through inefficiency and sloth. |Enormous effort and elaborate kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com |planning are required to waste this (650)857-7572 |much money | P.J. O'Rourke http://www.kirshenbaum.net/
Ben Zimmer - 20 Jan 2004 22:54 GMT > > > > No. I'm like you. I have no idea why I wrote that. Let's see > > > > if I can find a minimal pair. No, I don't think I can. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > After thinking a while, I finally found "nookie" and "noogie", which > work for me. Or "bookie/boogie", or "booker/booger"...
But if the alternating consonant is followed by a vowel, then the pair no longer fulfills your original condition:
> Phonetically, of course, the only place most of us in the US have a > length contrast is in pairs like "cap" and "cab", where the only > phonetic difference is that the vowel in the second is longer. Evan Kirshenbaum - 21 Jan 2004 00:49 GMT > > After thinking a while, I finally found "nookie" and "noogie", > > which work for me. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > length contrast is in pairs like "cap" and "cab", where the only > > phonetic difference is that the vowel in the second is longer. Oh, right. You've got aspiration, too. You do still have the length contrast, though.
 Signature Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |ActiveX is pretty harmless anyway. 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |It can't affect you unless you Palo Alto, CA 94304 |install Windows, and who would be |foolish enough to do that? kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com | Peter Moylan (650)857-7572
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/
R J Valentine - 21 Jan 2004 03:01 GMT } Ben Zimmer <bgzimmer@midway.uchicago.edu> writes: } }> }> > After thinking a while, I finally found "nookie" and "noogie", }> > which work for me. }> }> Or "bookie/boogie", or "booker/booger"...
[Cross-thread example, by the way:]
}> But if the alternating consonant is followed by a vowel, then the pair }> no longer fulfills your original condition: }> }> > Phonetically, of course, the only place most of us in the US have a }> > length contrast is in pairs like "cap" and "cab", where the only }> > phonetic difference is that the vowel in the second is longer. } } Oh, right. You've got aspiration, too. You do still have the length } contrast, though.
Putting/pudding (at least in America).
 Signature R. J. Valentine <mailto:rj@smart.net>
Evan Kirshenbaum - 21 Jan 2004 16:23 GMT > Putting/pudding (at least in America). Yeah. That works perfectly, since both the /t/ and the /d/ get merged into a flap [*] here. As you say, though, "in America". I still recall a class in which a British speaker was talking about his "writing teacher" in a way that didn't make sense, and it took the rest of us about ten minutes to realize that he was talking about his "(horse) riding teacher". He didn't lengthen the vowel, so we heard the flap as /t/. When we asked for confirmation ("Writing teacher?"), he heard our flap as a /d/, since it was unaspirated, and so interpreted it as "riding" and said "Yes, my riding teacher".
 Signature Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |All tax revenue is the result of 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |holding a gun to somebody's head. Palo Alto, CA 94304 |Not paying taxes is against the law. |If you don't pay your taxes, you'll kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com |be fined. If you don't pay the fine, (650)857-7572 |you'll be jailed. If you try to |escape from jail, you'll be shot. http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ | P.J. O'Rourke
Jonathan Jordan - 21 Jan 2004 18:08 GMT > > Putting/pudding (at least in America). > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > "(horse) riding teacher". He didn't lengthen the vowel, so we heard > the flap as /t/. I don't _think_ that /d/ would be a flap in BrE - it would be an actual [d]. (Usual caveat - I don't have any training in this subject.)
Curiously, I think I'm more likely to use [*] for /t/ than for /d/, mainly in phrases like "a lot of". Whatever, I do use it a bit, but not enough to stop its prevalence in AmE being one of the most noticeable American features to my ears, up there with the "not" that sounds like it's "gnat" and the raised "man" vowel.
> When we asked for confirmation ("Writing teacher?"), > he heard our flap as a /d/, since it was unaspirated, and so > interpreted it as "riding" and said "Yes, my riding teacher". Some Americans in AUE have claimed that they don't have that distinction. Interestingly the OED's "American" pronunciations show /d/ in "waiting" and "butter".
Jonathan
Evan Kirshenbaum - 21 Jan 2004 18:25 GMT > "Evan Kirshenbaum" <kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com> wrote in message > > I still recall a class in which a British speaker was talking [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > actual [d]. (Usual caveat - I don't have any training in this > subject.) No, you're right. I'm not sure why I wrote it that way. It would have been a [d].
 Signature Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |The body was wrapped in duct tape, 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |weighted down with concrete blocks Palo Alto, CA 94304 |and a telephone cord was tied |around the neck. Police suspect kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com |foul play... (650)857-7572
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/
Ben Zimmer - 21 Jan 2004 18:33 GMT > > > Putting/pudding (at least in America). > > [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > distinction. Interestingly the OED's "American" pronunciations show > /d/ in "waiting" and "butter". This is a recent decision by the OED editors-- only entries that have been revised for the New Edition (OED3) use /d/ for AmE flapped /t/. See Larry Trask's complaints about this on the Linguist List:
http://www.linguistlist.org/issues/12/12-2166.html http://www.linguistlist.org/issues/12/12-2228.html
DE781 - 17 Jan 2004 17:17 GMT Fontana:
>> Phonetically, of course, the only place most of us in the US have a >> length contrast is in pairs like "cap" and "cab", where the only [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >can" tense can vowel). This is a phonemic difference too (because of >"can"). I don't know about you, but I say "cap" and "cab" both with the short A sound. I say "can" with the short E sound, and "can" with some other sound--the sound I use in "Mary".
R J Valentine - 18 Jan 2004 04:09 GMT ... } I don't know about you, but I say "cap" and "cab" both with the short A sound.
But do you notice that one lasts longer than the other?
 Signature R. J. Valentine <mailto:rj@smart.net>
DE781 - 18 Jan 2004 04:24 GMT Valentine:
>} I don't know about you, but I say "cap" and "cab" both with the short A >sound. > >But do you notice that one lasts longer than the other? Yes, I'd say that "cab" lasts slightly longer than "cap", however they are both said, by me at least, with the short "A" sound--i.e., the "marry" sound. Fontana?
Comments?
Michael J Hardy - 19 Jan 2004 01:57 GMT > That may be true of "most of us in the US", but New York region speakers, > probably including Young Joey, have a difference in the quality of the > vowel ("cap" has the "be able can" lax can vowel, while "cab" has the "tin > can" tense can vowel). This is a phonemic difference too (because of > "can"). OK, you seem to presuppose that "can" is pronounced differently when it means "tin can" from the way it is pronounced when it means to be able, by speaker in the NY region. Do you have any way of describing to us what these sounds are?
Mike Hardy
Skitt - 19 Jan 2004 02:07 GMT >> That may be true of "most of us in the US", but New York region >> speakers, probably including Young Joey, have a difference in the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > when it means to be able, by speaker in the NY region. Do you > have any way of describing to us what these sounds are? I think that the difference is not confined to the NY region. See the pronunciations given im MWCD10. For "to be able" meaning I use the first one, except when emphasizing the word. For "tin can" it is always the second pronunciation shown for the verb entry, and the only one shown for the noun entry.
I'm pretty sure that your usage is the same, but you are not noticing it.
 Signature Skitt (in Hayward, California) www.geocities.com/opus731/
R F - 19 Jan 2004 02:43 GMT > > That may be true of "most of us in the US", but New York region speakers, > > probably including Young Joey, have a difference in the quality of the [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > differently when it means "tin can" from the way it is pronounced > when it means to be able, by speaker in the NY region. You are correct, sir.
> Do you have any way of describing to us what these sounds are? I don't have to. On the AUE website, somewhere, there's already a recording of me/my saying "Can a cat man a catamaran?". Ignore the unstressed "can", but listen to me say "cat" and "man"/"catamaran". "Tin can" rhymes with "man". "Be able can" has the vowel of "cat".
R J Valentine - 19 Jan 2004 04:15 GMT ... } I don't have to. On the AUE website, somewhere, there's already a } recording of me/my saying "Can a cat man a catamaran?". Ignore the } unstressed "can", but listen to me say "cat" and "man"/"catamaran". "Tin } can" rhymes with "man". "Be able can" has the vowel of "cat".
Only when _really_ emphasized. ("Well? _Can_ you?"). When moderately emphasized, the "be able" "can" is closer to "ken". (Of _course_ I can.)
 Signature R. J. Valentine <mailto:rj@smart.net>
DE781 - 19 Jan 2004 04:56 GMT Fontana:
>"Be able can" has the vowel of "cat". So you use "marry" and "Mary", then? I use "merry" and "Mary". Is that odd? Saying "can" (either one) with the "marry" vowel sounds, to me, British.
>When moderately >emphasized, the "be able" "can" is closer to "ken". Meaning the "merry" vowel? I *always* say "be able" "can" with the "merry" vowel, stressed or not.
R F - 19 Jan 2004 08:31 GMT > Fontana: > > >"Be able can" has the vowel of "cat". > > So you use "marry" and "Mary", then? "Cat"/"marry"/"be able can" (stressed) have the same vowel. I think from now on I'll use /a/ as the phonemic symbol for this. I'll use /&/ to represent the "man"/"Mary"/"tin can" vowel, and of course /E/ is the "merry"/"Ken" vowel. This is going to look odd, but so be it. It's high time we stop trying to force New York English, including Postwar New York Prestige Standard (The American RP of the Twenty-First Century[TM]) into the GenAm strai(gh)tjacket.
> I use "merry" and "Mary". Is that odd? No. That's mighty Mid-Atlantic of you, I'm sure.
> Saying "can" (either one) with the "marry" vowel sounds, to me, British. Well, you're the one who's told us that New York English is close to the 18th century British English!
> >When moderately > >emphasized, the "be able" "can" is closer to "ken". I didn't say that (not sure who did); my "be able can" is nothing like "ken". If anything, "tin can" is what's closer to "ken" in the New York English case.
> Meaning the "merry" vowel? I *always* say "be able" "can" with the "merry" > vowel, stressed or not. That's Jersey English, then. (Possibly also Boston English and Jamaica-Laurel English.)
Michael J Hardy - 20 Jan 2004 02:44 GMT > "Cat"/"marry"/"be able can" (stressed) have the same vowel. I'm right with you ... the "short a" sound, as we're taught to call it in first grade.
> I'll use /&/ to represent the "man"/"Mary"/"tin can" vowel, So you use a different vowel in "man" from the one used in "cat"? I'm sure /&/ has been used consistently for the short "a" sound on a.u.e. Is this the same sound you use in "air" and "care"? -- Mike Hardy
DE781 - 21 Jan 2004 21:17 GMT Hardy:
Fontana & I, living somewhat close to each other, seem to have very similar word pronunciations. We both have two distinct "A" prounciations: one is the "A" in "marry" and one is the "A" in "Mary". So, I'm pretty sure I can answer your questions about what Fontana has written.
>> "Cat"/"marry"/"be able can" (stressed) have the same vowel. > > I'm right with you ... the "short a" sound, as we're >taught to call it in first grade. Right. Short "A". This is our "marry" vowel sound.
>> I'll use /&/ to represent the "man"/"Mary"/"tin can" vowel, > > So you use a different vowel in "man" from the one used >in "cat"? Right. This is the "Mary" vowel.
> I'm sure /&/ has been used consistently for the >short "a" sound on a.u.e. Is this the same sound you use in >"air" and "care"? Right. "Air"/"care"/"Mary"/tin "can"/"man" all have the same vowel sound (not the standard short "A" sound). Whereas "cat"/"marry" (for me) have the standard short "A" sound, as do the both of them and be able "can", too, for Fontana. My be able "can" vowel is the short "E" (the "merry" sound) vowel for some reason.
R H Draney - 19 Jan 2004 07:30 GMT R F filted:
>> Do you have any way of describing to us what these sounds are? > >I don't have to. On the AUE website, somewhere, there's already a >recording of me/my saying "Can a cat man a catamaran?". Ignore the >unstressed "can", but listen to me say "cat" and "man"/"catamaran". "Tin >can" rhymes with "man". "Be able can" has the vowel of "cat". Might be fun to transcribe the entire limerick phonetically (contrast phonemically):
A canner exceedingly canny One morning remarked to his granny, "A canner can can Anything that he can, But a canner can't can a can, can he?"
....r
DE781 - 19 Jan 2004 04:54 GMT Hardy:
>Do you >have any way of describing to us what these sounds are? For me, "can" meaning "to be able" is pronounced with the "merry" vowel, making it a homophone with "Ken"; and "can" meaning "tin can" is pronounced with the "Mary" vowel, making it rhyme with the name "Dan". You don't do this? Fontana?
Anyone else? Bun Mui? Comments?
John Holmes - 17 Jan 2004 08:46 GMT >> Jones: >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > of "long" and "short" as the names for the contrast is pretty much > limited to the US. (I don't know about Canada.) They were taught the same way in Australia, at about Prep-Grade 1 level. It was part of the way that reading was taught by sounding out unfamiliar words.
> Phonetically, of course, the only place most of us in the US have a > length contrast is in pairs like "cap" and "cab", where the only [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > long O boat short O bot > long U butte short U but I think the pronunciation scheme in the old Oxford dictionaries worked like that: a vowel with a long bar over it was the long vowel; one with a concave-up hook above was the short vowel. So Britons should know what they are, even if they didn't call them 'long' and 'short'.
-- Regards John
Michael J Hardy - 16 Jan 2004 22:39 GMT > Did you people *never* learn short and long vowel sounds? > "Tin" is short "I"; "teen" is long "I". The way it's usually taught in school is that "tin" is short "i" and "teen" is long "e". In ASCIIPA, "tin" is [I] and "teen" is [i]. -- Mike Hardy
Raymond S. Wise - 16 Jan 2004 23:25 GMT > > Did you people *never* learn short and long vowel sounds? > > "Tin" is short "I"; "teen" is long "I". > > The way it's usually taught in school is that "tin" is > short "i" and "teen" is long "e". In ASCIIPA, "tin" is [I] > and "teen" is [i]. -- Mike Hardy And in the traditional American system of representing pronunciation, the sounds are indicated as follows (followed by the ASCII IPA equivalent):
"long 'e'": e with a macron, /i/.
"short 'e'": e with a breve, /E/.
"long 'i'": i with a macron, /aI/.
"short 'i'": i with a breve, /I/.
See http://www.brl.org/formats/gifs/emacron.gif and http://www.brl.org/formats/gifs/ebreve.gif
To most native speakers of American English, this was learned in elementary school, but I've learned in this newsgroup that some native speakers of English never learned such a system.
 Signature Raymond S. Wise Minneapolis, Minnesota USA
E-mail: mplsray @ yahoo . com
DE781 - 15 Jan 2004 01:36 GMT Zimmer:
>Had this been posted nowadays, it would no doubt have provoked a >blizzard of "Oy!"s. Don't worry, Zimms. Even back in 1991, someone knew enough to respond to the above message with the comment that "engineering" and "entertainment" come from French and have therefore retained the French pronunciation of "en". That's something I didn't know. The poster also stated that, because "English" is an "English" word, "English" is correctly pronounced when "en" becomes "in".
Another interesting historical AUE factoid:
A thread titled "Subjunctive" was the only thread that originated on the AUE's first day and reappeared within the past year (as recently as Oct '03); it also popped up in '94, '95, '98, and '00. Back in '91 people were convinced that the subjunctive mood was dead everywhere but in America, where it'd eventually die out "within our lifetimes". How wrong those primitive net people were!
DE781 - 14 Jan 2004 22:45 GMT And, Ben proves that there is nothing unaccpetable about using multiple question marks:
"Well, [whoever], the next time you use the English language in a non-verbal context you should post it.
/Bill
?????? How is it possible to use the English language in a non-verbal context?"
DE781 - 14 Jan 2004 22:53 GMT "=> It is not a verbal contract ... but an oral one that => is not worth the paper it is written on. = = =An oral contract "is not worth the paper it's written on"? =I must be lost!
It's a "samuelgoldwynism." Also referred to as "goldwynesque speech"!"
HUH???!!!
Evan Kirshenbaum - 15 Jan 2004 03:52 GMT > "=> It is not a verbal contract ... but an oral one that > => is not worth the paper it is written on. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > HUH???!!! So give us your best guess as to the name of the person that might refer to, and let us know what happens when you hand that name to Google.
 Signature Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |The skinny models whose main job is 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |to display clothes aren't hired for Palo Alto, CA 94304 |their sex appeal. They're hired |for their resemblance to a kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com |coat-hanger. (650)857-7572 | Peter Moylan
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/
R J Valentine - 15 Jan 2004 06:08 GMT } de781@aol.com (DE781) writes: } }> "=> It is not a verbal contract ... but an oral one that }> => is not worth the paper it is written on. }> = }> = }> =An oral contract "is not worth the paper it's written on"? }> =I must be lost! }> }> It's a "samuelgoldwynism." Also referred to as "goldwynesque speech"!" }> }> HUH???!!! } } So give us your best guess as to the name of the person that might } refer to, and let us know what happens when you hand that name to } Google.
Come on, Ev! There's a such of a thing as being TOO easy on the kid.
 Signature R. J. Valentine <mailto:arjay@wicked.smart.net>
DE781 - 15 Jan 2004 22:22 GMT Evan:
>> =An oral contract "is not worth the paper it's written on"? >> =I must be lost! [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >So give us your best guess as to the name of the person that might >refer to, "Samuel Goldwyn"? Is he Google-able? Is that even the right name?
R H Draney - 15 Jan 2004 23:39 GMT DE781 filted:
>"Samuel Goldwyn"? Is he Google-able? Is that even the right name? It's the one most likely to be Googleable; he was also known as Samuel Gelbfisch and even "Sam Goldfish" by those who felt he had forgotten his humble beginnings....
When you find him on the web, he'll often be in the company of Dizzy Dean, Casey Stengel and Yogi Berra (baseball players), Dan Quayle (son of a prominent newspaper publisher), and Eugene Ormandy (orchestra conductor)....r
Evan Kirshenbaum - 16 Jan 2004 00:30 GMT > When you find him on the web, he'll often be in the company of Dizzy > Dean, Casey Stengel and Yogi Berra (baseball players), Dan Quayle > (son of a prominent newspaper publisher), and Eugene Ormandy > (orchestra conductor)....r I don't think I've ever seen Ormandy mentioned as a source of such things. I see a list of his at
http://users.actrix.co.nz/dgold/fun/ormandy.html
and they're pretty good, but I don't think I've heard any of them before. (With the exception of "I don't want to confuse you any more than absolutely necessary".)
 Signature Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |I believe there are more instances 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |of the abridgment of the freedom of Palo Alto, CA 94304 |the people by gradual and silent |encroachments of those in power kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com |than by violent and sudden (650)857-7572 |usurpations. | James Madison http://www.kirshenbaum.net/
DE781 - 16 Jan 2004 20:26 GMT Draney:
>When you find him on the web, he'll often be in the company of Dizzy Dean, >Casey >Stengel and Yogi Berra (baseball players), I know who Yogi is. He lives near me.
>Dan Quayle (son of a prominent >newspaper publisher), Is he the same "Dan Quayle" who used to be the vice-president? The potatoe dude?
BTW, thanks for the help. I've found some sites, but I'm not sure they'll be enough to explain to me what a "Samuel Goldwynism" is. Unless he's like Yogi...
Wait a minute...the first time the person mentioned the "Samuel Goldwynism", I thought to myself why didn't he just say a "Yogi Berrism", if that's what he was trying to get at. Based on what I know about Yogi & Qualye, and I'd guess Goldwyn, were all those names you listed people who said bizarre things?
That could be. But, I don't get it. Because Dan Quayle only spelt something wrong. Yogi made up funny sayings. Why isn't Bush on that list then too? Am I reading too deeply into things?
At any rate, Yogi is *definitely* more famous for saying bizarre things than Goldwyn, so why *didn't* the poster use "Yogism"?
david56 - 16 Jan 2004 20:54 GMT de781@aol.com spake thus:
> At any rate, Yogi is *definitely* more famous for saying bizarre things than > Goldwyn, so why *didn't* the poster use "Yogism"? I know I'm not supposed to be talking to you, but you are certainly giving us plenty of laughs in between the abuse.
 Signature David =====
DE781 - 17 Jan 2004 17:11 GMT David:
>> At any rate, Yogi is *definitely* more famous for saying bizarre things >than >> Goldwyn, so why *didn't* the poster use "Yogism"? > >I know I'm not supposed to be talking to you, but you are certainly >giving us plenty of laughs in between the abuse. I don't get it.
Evan Kirshenbaum - 16 Jan 2004 20:59 GMT > That could be. But, I don't get it. Because Dan Quayle only spelt > something wrong. Some quotes by Dan Quayle (actual ones, according to Snopes):
If we don't succeed, we run the risk of failure.
Republicans understand the importance of bondage between a mother and child.
Mars is essentially in the same orbit . . . Mars is somewhat the same distance from the Sun, which is very important. We have seen pictures where there are canals, we believe, and water. If there is water, that means there is oxygen. If oxygen, that means we can breathe.
What a waste it is to lose one's mind. Or not to have a mind is being very wasteful. How true that is.
I believe we are on an irreversible trend toward more freedom and democracy - but that could change.
One word sums up probably the responsibility of any vice president, and that one word is 'to be prepared.'
We're going to have the best-educated American people in the world.
I stand by all the misstatements that I've made.
I love California, I practically grew up in Phoenix.
We are ready for any unforeseen event that may or may not occur.
It isn't pollution that's harming the environment. It's the impurities in our air and water that are doing it.
http://www.snopes.com/quotes/quayle.htm
It turns out that he *didn't* actually say
I was recently on a tour of Latin America, and the only regret I have was that I didn't study Latin harder in school so I could converse with those people.
although it was widely reported that he had. (It was told (not by Quayle) as a joke and picked up as news.)
 Signature Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |"The Dynamics of Interbeing and 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |Monological Imperatives in 'Dick Palo Alto, CA 94304 |and Jane' : A Study in Psychic |Transrelational Modes." kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com | Calvin (650)857-7572
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/
DE781 - 17 Jan 2004 17:13 GMT Evan:
>ome quotes by Dan Quayle (actual ones, according to Snopes): Thanks for all the quotes. WOW! Quayle sounded worse than Bush. How come the only thing you ever hear about is potatoe? And why does everyone act like Bush is the first person who screws up the language to ever be in office?
DE781 - 16 Jan 2004 20:29 GMT Wow! I found some Goldwyn quotes! I *like* the way this guy thinks! I wish I could come up with such amazing quotes like that!
|
|
|