What's the word for
James Nicoll
to use? Not one that sounds the same but something totally unrelated,
like dog for god or from for for.
--
Take the piston rings out of my stomach, And the cylinders out of my brain
Extract from my liver the crankshaft, And assemble the engine again!
[from 'The Dying Aviator']
Zeborah
> A correctly spelled word that is not the one the author intended
> to use? Not one that sounds the same but something totally unrelated,
> like dog for god or from for for.
Braino?
Zeborah
--
Gravity is no joke.
http://www.geocities.com/zeborahnz/
Mary Gentle
Nicoll) wrote:
> A correctly spelled word that is not the one the author intended
> to use? Not one that sounds the same but something totally unrelated,
> like dog for god or from for for.
"Brain-fart"?
Well, OK, that's two words, but . . . :)
Mary
Most recently published:
1610: A SUNDIAL IN A GRAVE, novel, Orion UK, hc & tpb
CARTOMANCY, short story collection, Orion UK, pb
Shelly
>(James
>Nicoll) wrote:
>
>> A correctly spelled word that is not the one the author intended
>> to use? Not one that sounds the same but something totally unrelated,
>> like dog for god or from for for.
>
>"Brain-fart"?
>
>Well, OK, that's two words, but . . . :)
>
>
>Mary
How about: Mistake
:)
Shelly
http://journals.aol.com/shellys555/CyberChocolate/
http://www.livejournal.com/users/prestoimp/
Dorothy J Heydt
Shelly <shell...@aol.com> wrote:
>>mary_...@cix.co.uk (Mary Gentle) wrote:
>
>>(James
>>Nicoll) wrote:
>>
>>> A correctly spelled word that is not the one the author intended
>>> to use? Not one that sounds the same but something totally unrelated,
>>> like dog for god or from for for.
>>
>>"Brain-fart"?
>>
>>Well, OK, that's two words, but . . . :)
>>
>
I like "braino", on the model of "typo;" I think that comes
closest to describing the process that generates it. I find I do
those all too often as I get older and the brain slowly collapses
into oozing pink jelly.
Dorothy J. Heydt
Albany, California
djh...@kithrup.com
lclough
I have heard the term "thinko" to be used.
Brenda
---------
Brenda W. Clough
http://www.sff.net/people/Brenda/
Recent short fiction: PARADOX, Autumn 2003
http://home.nyc.rr.com/paradoxmag//index.html
Upcoming short fiction in FIRST HEROES (TOR, May '04)
http://members.aol.com/wenamun/firstheroes.html
Shelly
>Shelly <shell...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>mary_...@cix.co.uk (Mary Gentle) wrote:
>>
>>>(James
>>>Nicoll) wrote:
>>>
>>>> A correctly spelled word that is not the one the author intended
>>>> to use? Not one that sounds the same but something totally unrelated,
>>>> like dog for god or from for for.
>>>
>>>"Brain-fart"?
>>>
>>>Well, OK, that's two words, but . . . :)
>>>
>>
>>How about: Mistake
>
>I like "braino", on the model of "typo;" I think that comes
>closest to describing the process that generates it. I find I do
>those all too often as I get older and the brain slowly collapses
>into oozing pink jelly.
I like it, too. I even use it. But someone beat me to it here. Which is why I'm
glad I read the thread before answering. And if I hand write a wrong word or
misspell a word, my friends and I call those writos.
Now will someone pass the Fritos? Or Cheetos?
David Goldfarb
James Nicoll <jdni...@panix.com> wrote:
> A correctly spelled word that is not the one the author intended
>to use? Not one that sounds the same but something totally unrelated,
>like dog for god or from for for.
This is sometimes known as a "malapropism", especially if the word
is a long one. (From a character called "Mrs. Malaprop" in Sheridan's
play _The Rivals_, who liked to use two-dollar words but in her ignorance
got them wrong. The character's name in turn comes from the French
phrase "mal apropos".)
--
David Goldfarb |
gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu | What if there were no hypothetical situations?
gold...@csua.berkeley.edu |
Marilee J. Layman
>>djh...@kithrup.com wrote:
>
>>Shelly <shell...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>mary_...@cix.co.uk (Mary Gentle) wrote:
>>>
>>>>(James
>>>>Nicoll) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> A correctly spelled word that is not the one the author intended
>>>>> to use? Not one that sounds the same but something totally unrelated,
>>>>> like dog for god or from for for.
>>>>
>>>>"Brain-fart"?
>>>>
>>>>Well, OK, that's two words, but . . . :)
>>>>
>>>
>>>How about: Mistake
>>
>>I like "braino", on the model of "typo;" I think that comes
>>closest to describing the process that generates it. I find I do
>>those all too often as I get older and the brain slowly collapses
>>into oozing pink jelly.
>
>I like it, too. I even use it. But someone beat me to it here. Which is why I'm
>glad I read the thread before answering. And if I hand write a wrong word or
>misspell a word, my friends and I call those writos.
>
>Now will someone pass the Fritos? Or Cheetos?
The breeder where Spirit and Giorgio originally came from had so many
cats she ran out of reasonable names. Spirit was Cheyenne Spirit and
Giorgio was Green Ice, which aren't so bad, but there was a cat named
MunchaBunchaFritos.
--
Marilee J. Layman
G.W. Bush says "results count!"
That's why I'm voting for Kerry.
Eric Jarvis
>
> The breeder where Spirit and Giorgio originally came from had so many
> cats she ran out of reasonable names. Spirit was Cheyenne Spirit and
> Giorgio was Green Ice, which aren't so bad, but there was a cat named
> MunchaBunchaFritos.
>
One can only hope that the poor thing was blissfully unaware of the
indignity. That's a terrible thing to do to a finely honed killing
machine.
--
eric
www.ericjarvis.co.uk
"live fast, die only if strictly necessary"
Helen
Gentle <mary_...@cix.co.uk> writes
>In article <cft459$ntv$1...@panix3.panix.com>, jdni...@panix.com (James
>Nicoll) wrote:
>
>> A correctly spelled word that is not the one the author intended
>> to use? Not one that sounds the same but something totally unrelated,
>> like dog for god or from for for.
>
>"Brain-fart"?
>
>Well, OK, that's two words, but . . . :)
>
than my brain actually coming up with the wrong word. My fingers
sometimes pick up letters and syllables from words further on in the
sentence, words that are hanging in the limbo between "not yet composed"
and "written on the screen" and sort of combine them into what they're
supposed to be typing at that moment. I don't think I do it when I'm
hand writing.
What my brain *does* do is sometimes lose a word completely, which
results in me gesticulating (as though I could drag the word out of my
head) and staring hopefully out of the window, as though it might happen
to float by.
The other sort of mistakes that are a devil to spot are spell-checkeros,
where you type something weird and it either autocorrects without you
noticing, or you get trigger-happy on the Change button and don't check
what you're being offered carefully enough.
There was one of these in one of the stories I'm marking at the moment.
"...all footsteps have been irradiated and dreams buried." I suspect it
was meant to be "eradicated".
Helen
--
Helen, Gwynedd, Wales *** http://www.baradel.demon.co.uk
Joann Zimmerman
clo...@erols.com says...
> I have heard the term "thinko" to be used.
Seconded. Of course, it also applies to serious errors in design.
--
"I never understood people who don't have bookshelves."
--George Plimpton
Joann Zimmerman jz...@bellereti.com
Dorothy J Heydt
Helen <ken...@baradel.demon.co.uk.please.delete.this> wrote:
>The other sort of mistakes that are a devil to spot are spell-checkeros,
>where you type something weird and it either autocorrects without you
>noticing, or you get trigger-happy on the Change button and don't check
>what you're being offered carefully enough.
The way to avoid that is to use a sufficiently elderly word-mangler.
I'm typing this in vi, this has no autocorrect at all, though
there is a "spell" function that you can run it through. On the
PC I use Word 2.0, with a spell function you can run before
quitting the file, but not if you don't want to.
I remember using a similar system on a Mac at work, which always
wanted to change the professor's name--Cozzarelli--into
"mozzarella." Until someone showed me how to make a special
dictionary.
Darkhawk (H. Nicoll)
> What my brain *does* do is sometimes lose a word completely, which
> results in me gesticulating (as though I could drag the word out of my
> head) and staring hopefully out of the window, as though it might happen
> to float by.
I do this far more often in conversations than in any form of text
production; the brain-to-mouth wiring seems to be run by entirely
different processes than the brain-to-fingers wiring.
I am still deeply pleased by the fact that in a conversation at Minicon
several years back I managed to gesticulate in such a way that someone
else in the conversation managed to come up with the word I was missing,
which was "centrifuge".
--
Darkhawk - H. A. Nicoll - http://aelfhame.net/~darkhawk/
They are one person, they are two alone
They are three together, they are for each other
- "Helplessly Hoping", Crosby, Stills, Nash, and Young
Marilee J. Layman
wrote:
>Marilee J. Layman mjla...@erols.com wrote:
>>
>> The breeder where Spirit and Giorgio originally came from had so many
>> cats she ran out of reasonable names. Spirit was Cheyenne Spirit and
>> Giorgio was Green Ice, which aren't so bad, but there was a cat named
>> MunchaBunchaFritos.
>>
>
>One can only hope that the poor thing was blissfully unaware of the
>indignity. That's a terrible thing to do to a finely honed killing
>machine.
She called it just "Munch" most of the time, and it didn't seem to
think it was a bad name.
Dorothy J Heydt
Darkhawk (H. Nicoll) <dark...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>I am still deeply pleased by the fact that in a conversation at Minicon
>several years back I managed to gesticulate in such a way that someone
>else in the conversation managed to come up with the word I was missing,
>which was "centrifuge".
Oh, that's quite believable, given a suitable context such as "So
they put my blood in the .... ..." <gestures in a circular motion
in the horizontal plane> or maybe "But the space station is like
a .... ..." <gestures in a circular motion in the vertical plane>
or .... .... I can't think of any other contexts offhand.
Dan Goodman
news:I2pG0...@kithrup.com:
> Helen <ken...@baradel.demon.co.uk.please.delete.this> wrote:
>
>>The other sort of mistakes that are a devil to spot are
>>spell-checkeros, where you type something weird and it either
>>autocorrects without you noticing, or you get trigger-happy on the
>>Change button and don't check what you're being offered carefully
>>enough.
>
> The way to avoid that is to use a sufficiently elderly word-mangler.
> I'm typing this in vi, this has no autocorrect at all, though
> there is a "spell" function that you can run it through. On the
> PC I use Word 2.0, with a spell function you can run before
> quitting the file, but not if you don't want to.
>
> I remember using a similar system on a Mac at work, which always
> wanted to change the professor's name--Cozzarelli--into
> "mozzarella." Until someone showed me how to make a special
> dictionary.
With most programs that have spell-checking, you can set it NOT to
autocorrect. Never. Ever.
--
Dan Goodman
Journal http://dsgood.blogspot.com or
http://www.livejournal.com/users/dsgood/ Whatever you wish for me, may
you have twice as much.
Darkhawk (H. Nicoll)
I believe we were discussing horseshoe crabs.
(But putting the blood in the centrifuge was in fact the relevant bit.)
Dorothy J Heydt
Dan Goodman <dsg...@visi.com> wrote:
>djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote in
>news:I2pG0...@kithrup.com:
>
>> wanted to change the professor's name--Cozzarelli--into
>> "mozzarella." Until someone showed me how to make a special
>> dictionary.
>
>With most programs that have spell-checking, you can set it NOT to
>autocorrect. Never. Ever.
And it's possible that this one could so have been set too. I
just didn't know how. Macs and I never did get along.
Marilee J. Layman
(H. Nicoll)) wrote:
>Helen <mh...@baradel.demon.co.uk.please.delete.this> wrote:
>> What my brain *does* do is sometimes lose a word completely, which
>> results in me gesticulating (as though I could drag the word out of my
>> head) and staring hopefully out of the window, as though it might happen
>> to float by.
>
>I do this far more often in conversations than in any form of text
>production; the brain-to-mouth wiring seems to be run by entirely
>different processes than the brain-to-fingers wiring.
I briefly wondered if one of my neighbors had gone mad this afternoon.
She had driven home from work, but was stomping around her car making
wild gestures, and then she turned so I could see the microphone. She
must work in DC -- you're not allowed to use cell phones directly
there, you have to have a headset or vocal command.
Catja Pafort
> Usually I blame my fingers, because it's more a communication glitch
> than my brain actually coming up with the wrong word. My fingers
> sometimes pick up letters and syllables from words further on in the
> sentence, words that are hanging in the limbo between "not yet composed"
> and "written on the screen" and sort of combine them into what they're
> supposed to be typing at that moment. I don't think I do it when I'm
> hand writing.
I never used to until I started to handwrite _a lot_ - and I've caught a
few thinkos now. As the wiring between brain and hand gets better, the
errors creep in.
> The other sort of mistakes that are a devil to spot are spell-checkeros,
> where you type something weird and it either autocorrects without you
> noticing, or you get trigger-happy on the Change button and don't check
> what you're being offered carefully enough.
>
> There was one of these in one of the stories I'm marking at the moment.
> "...all footsteps have been irradiated and dreams buried." I suspect it
> was meant to be "eradicated".
I don't autocorrect, but good words in bad places are the thing that
artificial intelligence is needed for in place of mere comparison with a
sequence of strings.
I ride. I read a lot of horsey lists and newsgroups. I write event when
I mean invent, rein when I mean rain, and a couple more I can't remember
now.
Catja
Helen
>> wanted to change the professor's name--Cozzarelli--into
>> "mozzarella." Until someone showed me how to make a special
>> dictionary.
>
>With most programs that have spell-checking, you can set it NOT to
>autocorrect. Never. Ever.
>
prevent you yourself from clicking "Change" without really reading what
it's offering. That's how this kind of mistake often happens because I
remember seeing them from the days before autocorrect when all
spellcheckers had to be run manually.
Jacey Bedford
(H. Nicoll)" <dark...@mindspring.com> writes
>Helen <mh...@baradel.demon.co.uk.please.delete.this> wrote:
>> What my brain *does* do is sometimes lose a word completely, which
>> results in me gesticulating (as though I could drag the word out of my
>> head) and staring hopefully out of the window, as though it might happen
>> to float by.
>
>I do this far more often in conversations than in any form of text
>production; the brain-to-mouth wiring seems to be run by entirely
>different processes than the brain-to-fingers wiring.
Speech uses muscle memory.
F'rinstance, when you're learning a song you should always mouth the
words as well as read them to yourself and/or write them down. In that
way, your face remembers the next word even if your brain forgets it. So
you can be in the middle of singing a song on stage and your mind goes
blank, but your mouth still comes up with an approximation of the
correct word - you might end up singing _back_ instead of _black_,
though, or vice versa.
Jacey
--
Jacey Bedford
jacey at artisan hyphen harmony dot com
Jacey Bedford
<gold...@OCF.Berkeley.EDU> writes
>In article <cft459$ntv$1...@panix3.panix.com>,
>James Nicoll <jdni...@panix.com> wrote:
>> A correctly spelled word that is not the one the author intended
>>to use? Not one that sounds the same but something totally unrelated,
>>like dog for god or from for for.
>
>This is sometimes known as a "malapropism", especially if the word
>is a long one. (From a character called "Mrs. Malaprop" in Sheridan's
>play _The Rivals_, who liked to use two-dollar words but in her ignorance
>got them wrong. The character's name in turn comes from the French
>phrase "mal apropos".)
>
Like my friend's mother who always likes to use an _escapade_ instead of
an escalator in a department store to get from one floor up to the next.
The word has now passed into common usage in our family.
Dan Goodman
>
> F'rinstance, when you're learning a song you should always mouth the
> words as well as read them to yourself and/or write them down. In that
> way, your face remembers the next word even if your brain forgets it.
> So you can be in the middle of singing a song on stage and your mind
> goes blank, but your mouth still comes up with an approximation of the
> correct word - you might end up singing _back_ instead of _black_,
> though, or vice versa.
Caution: It may not work for everybody.
If the relevant experts take for granted it works for everybody, that
doesn't mean it's true. For several thousand years, people writing about
memory improvement have taken it for granted that everyone's memory is
primarily visual. This is not true now; it almost certainly was not true
in Renaissance Italy or Classical Athens.
If it works for you -- I've read about a mathematician who took it for
granted that all his colleagues used synesthesia (synaesthesia) in their
work. He was 60 when he found out that this wasn't true.
Mary K. Kuhner
Jacey Bedford <look...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>Speech uses muscle memory.
>F'rinstance, when you're learning a song you should always mouth the
>words as well as read them to yourself and/or write them down. In that
>way, your face remembers the next word even if your brain forgets it. So
>you can be in the middle of singing a song on stage and your mind goes
>blank, but your mouth still comes up with an approximation of the
>correct word - you might end up singing _back_ instead of _black_,
>though, or vice versa.
This can be creepy--sometimes it's like you're listening to what's
coming out of your mouth while someone else is singing it. When I've
done this, it splices verses together wildly whenever they have a few
words in common--the results sound like one of those random-text
programs which work by collecting frequencies of 2 or 3 word phrases
and then assembling them at random.
When I was visiting a different martial arts school, someone asked me
a hard question and then attacked me while I was still thinking about
it. I had her, literally, on the mat and nicely pinned before I had
the first idea about what I was doing. *That* never happened to me
before, and I was quite startled.
ObSF: I bet tape learning and other fast-learning methods would let
you in for a lot of surprises like these, possibly dangerous ones.
Heaven help you if you figure out how to use an alien's tape-learning
setup! I can just imagine doing a physical move by this sort of "trained"
reflex, and only then finding out that the last step is "brace yourself
with your tail" or "fold your head down to your chest." Ow. The
social equivalents probably aren't much better.
Mary Kuhner mkku...@eskimo.com
Marilee J. Layman
Our mother encouraged us to play with words so my brother and I have
lots of words like that. Escalator is alligator, for example.
Dan Goodman
> ObSF: I bet tape learning and other fast-learning methods would let
> you in for a lot of surprises like these, possibly dangerous ones.
> Heaven help you if you figure out how to use an alien's tape-learning
> setup! I can just imagine doing a physical move by this sort of
> "trained" reflex, and only then finding out that the last step is
> "brace yourself with your tail" or "fold your head down to your
> chest." Ow. The social equivalents probably aren't much better.
In Larry Niven's "The Fourth Profession," the narrator has turned down a
pill which would give him all the needed skills for unarmed combat against
an intelligent worm -- provided he was himself an intelligent worm.
Martial-arts tape from the brain of someone who's righthanded and a visual
thinker would
probably do me no good.
Mary K. Kuhner
Dan Goodman <dsg...@visi.com> wrote:
>Martial-arts tape from the brain of someone who's righthanded and a visual
>thinker would probably do me no good.
I think you'd be lucky if "no good" was all it did you.
I know a 5'5" teenager who was recently a 4'8" child. He's having a tough
time of it--arms and legs everywhere. And he at least had a few months to
get used to the idea.
It's harder to imagine what the collision between a visual thinker's
skillset and a verbal or kinesthetic thinker's brain would be, but I
bet it would be "interesting". And consider an olfactory or sonar-based
learner!
Mary Kuhner mkku...@eskimo.com
Zeborah
> F'rinstance, when you're learning a song you should always mouth the words
> as well as read them to yourself and/or write them down. In that way, your
> face remembers the next word even if your brain forgets it. So you can be
> in the middle of singing a song on stage and your mind goes blank, but
> your mouth still comes up with an approximation of the correct word - you
> might end up singing _back_ instead of _black_, though, or vice versa.
Unless I'm paying attention, I always end up singing "Most highly
flavoured lady, gloria".
Zeborah
--
Gravity is no joke.
http://www.geocities.com/zeborahnz/
Anna Mazzoldi
Recently I was supposed to have an operation called endometrial ablation. I
kept referring to it as "abduction" (though I actually knew the right word
-- the wrong one just came to the mouth first). _Some_ of the doctors
thought it was funny...
--
Anna Mazzoldi <http://aynathie.livejournal.com/>
If you're happy and you know it, clunk your chains.
Warrick M. Locke
green...@cix.co.uk.invalid says...
> Helen wrote:
>
> > Usually I blame my fingers, because it's more a communication glitch
> > than my brain actually coming up with the wrong word. My fingers
> > sometimes pick up letters and syllables from words further on in the
> > sentence, words that are hanging in the limbo between "not yet composed"
> > and "written on the screen" and sort of combine them into what they're
> > supposed to be typing at that moment. I don't think I do it when I'm
> > hand writing.
>
> I never used to until I started to handwrite _a lot_ - and I've caught a
> few thinkos now. As the wiring between brain and hand gets better, the
> errors creep in.
I can _not_ handwrite. Typing -- keyboarding -- goes fast enough that I
can regulate my brain down to the same speed sometimes, but trying to
form letters that are readable slows me down so much that I'm frequently
finding myself trying to write partial words from the next sentence.
The only way I can compose anything by hand is to have it clear in
memory, then put on the Drafting Machine Hat to letter it. It's been so
long since I had to do that for a living that the result is hardly better
than longhand.
It means that pen porn totally fails to affect my breathing :-)
Regards,
Ric
Jonathan L Cunningham
On my fantasy wish-list for things I'd like to experience one day:
having my corpus callosum temporarily anaesthetised, so that both of
me could experience what it felt like to be half a brain.
I just hope my right-brain knows enough words to describe the
experience. (That's me, the left-brain, who wrote that second
paragraph. My right-brain doesn't usually say much, but I think I
am both agreed it would be an interesting experience. It might
even have been his idea -- he feels it would give him more
incentive to improve his vocabulary if I didn't keep butting in
when he wants to say something.)
Jonathan
--
Use jlc1 at address, not spam.
Jonathan L Cunningham
(David Goldfarb) wrote:
>In article <cft459$ntv$1...@panix3.panix.com>,
>James Nicoll <jdni...@panix.com> wrote:
>> A correctly spelled word that is not the one the author intended
>>to use? Not one that sounds the same but something totally unrelated,
>>like dog for god or from for for.
>
>This is sometimes known as a "malapropism", especially if the word
>is a long one. (From a character called "Mrs. Malaprop" in Sheridan's
>play _The Rivals_, who liked to use two-dollar words but in her ignorance
>got them wrong. The character's name in turn comes from the French
>phrase "mal apropos".)
Darn! You're right. I just went and looked up "homonym" thinking that
James meant things like "there" instead of "their" but he does say
"Not one that sounds the same".
What do you call it when you read a correctly spelled word that is not
the one the author wrote? :-).
Catja Pafort
> With most programs that have spell-checking, you can set it NOT to
> autocorrect. Never. Ever.
I used to run a global autocorrect that would always insert the correct
date if I typed dtm, expand Kls to Kulturlandschaft (a word I was using
a lot at that time) and catch things like 'teh'.
I miss it, but with newer systems it was clashing with the other buffer
intercept, which dumps all keystrokes in a text file and does the
autosave, and I need that more.
Word Perfect, unlike M$Word, which Dorothy most likely used, has an
opt-in list for autocorrect - so 'teh', once again, is eliminated as I
type it, and I type it from time to time.
To geographers, fiction writers, and people using more than one
language, a computer that tries to match everything you write with its
internal dictionary is going to cause more frustration than it will
provide help.
Catja
Dan Goodman
> Dan wrote:
>
>> With most programs that have spell-checking, you can set it NOT to
>> autocorrect. Never. Ever.
>
> I used to run a global autocorrect that would always insert the correct
> date if I typed dtm, expand Kls to Kulturlandschaft (a word I was using
> a lot at that time) and catch things like 'teh'.
> I miss it, but with newer systems it was clashing with the other buffer
> intercept, which dumps all keystrokes in a text file and does the
> autosave, and I need that more.
>
> Word Perfect, unlike M$Word, which Dorothy most likely used, has an
> opt-in list for autocorrect - so 'teh', once again, is eliminated as I
> type it, and I type it from time to time.
I wouldn't use an opt-in list either.
> To geographers, fiction writers, and people using more than one
> language, a computer that tries to match everything you write with its
> internal dictionary is going to cause more frustration than it will
> provide help.
On the Ballad-L list, there's a blind woman who studies Irish folk songs
-- in both English and Gaelic. Her speech reader can't cope with two
languages.
Mary K. Kuhner
Catja Pafort <green...@cix.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>To geographers, fiction writers, and people using more than one
>language, a computer that tries to match everything you write with its
>internal dictionary is going to cause more frustration than it will
>provide help.
My father is a hunt-and-peck typist who does not look at the
screen while typing, which is why it took him a whole chapter
about the Chinese philosopher Hsi to realize that Word was
autocorrecting it to His.
Mary Kuhner mkku...@eskimo.com
Jacey Bedford
<dsg...@visi.com> writes
>green...@cix.co.uk.invalid (Catja Pafort) wrote:
>
>> Dan wrote:
>>
>>> With most programs that have spell-checking, you can set it NOT to
>>> autocorrect. Never. Ever.
>>
>> I used to run a global autocorrect that would always insert the correct
>> date if I typed dtm, expand Kls to Kulturlandschaft (a word I was using
>> a lot at that time) and catch things like 'teh'.
>> I miss it, but with newer systems it was clashing with the other buffer
>> intercept, which dumps all keystrokes in a text file and does the
>> autosave, and I need that more.
>>
>> Word Perfect, unlike M$Word, which Dorothy most likely used, has an
>> opt-in list for autocorrect - so 'teh', once again, is eliminated as I
>> type it, and I type it from time to time.
>
>I wouldn't use an opt-in list either.
>
>> To geographers, fiction writers, and people using more than one
>> language, a computer that tries to match everything you write with its
>> internal dictionary is going to cause more frustration than it will
>> provide help.
>
>On the Ballad-L list, there's a blind woman who studies Irish folk songs
>-- in both English and Gaelic. Her speech reader can't cope with two
>languages.
>
Harry Erwin
I've been avoiding getting involved in this discussion, mostly because
this is related to my current research area. Let me put it this way--
it's a lot wierder than you think.
--
Harry Erwin <http://www.theworld.com/~herwin>
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our
country and our people, and neither do we."--George W. Bush
Neil Barnes
news:41273852...@usenet.plus.net:
> On my fantasy wish-list for things I'd like to experience one
> day: having my corpus callosum temporarily anaesthetised, so
> that both of me could experience what it felt like to be half
> a brain.
>
> I just hope my right-brain knows enough words to describe the
> experience. (That's me, the left-brain, who wrote that second
> paragraph. My right-brain doesn't usually say much, but I
> think I am both agreed it would be an interesting experience.
> It might even have been his idea -- he feels it would give him
> more incentive to improve his vocabulary if I didn't keep
> butting in when he wants to say something.)
>
> Jonathan
^s
Neil
--
note - the email address in this message is valid - Hotmail have
improved their spam killing no end. Ignore previous suggestions
to use ntlworld.
Charlie Stross
as <jdni...@panix.com> declared:
> A correctly spelled word that is not the one the author intended
> to use? Not one that sounds the same but something totally unrelated,
> like dog for god or from for for.
A malapropism, surely?
-- Charlie
Zeborah
> Mary K. Kuhner <mkku...@kingman.gs.washington.edu> wrote:
[potential problems of brain-taping]
> > It's harder to imagine what the collision between a visual thinker's
> > skillset and a verbal or kinesthetic thinker's brain would be, but I
> > bet it would be "interesting". And consider an olfactory or sonar-based
> > learner!
>
> I've been avoiding getting involved in this discussion, mostly because
> this is related to my current research area. Let me put it this way--
> it's a lot wierder than you think.
Oh, the story ideas that arise!
Zeborah
> What do you call it when you read a correctly spelled word that is not
> the one the author wrote? :-).
Quite often "a dirty mind".
Harry Erwin
I worry about the amount of neuroscience the reader would need to know
to follow some of them. For example, we know mammals live in a _model_
of the world that is only sparsely connected with reality. Synesthesia
is only one of the weird phenomena that we encounter in our work. My
current research is trying to sort out some of the issues involving how
we predict the trajectory of objects. It doesn't seem to involve vector
representations, although I won't reject that approach completely until
I've taken another look at Pribram's holonomic (or holographic) memory
models.
Catja Pafort
> What do you call it when you read a correctly spelled word that is not
> the one the author wrote? :-).
Braino.
The company I am currently designing a website for has promotional
material that talks about their uninformed staff.
Err, that is 'uniformed,' of course, but I had to read that thrice to
make sure that I they wrote it right, because I was _expecting_
something positive, 'well-informed' would have met my expectations; and
the contrast to un-informed was jarring. 'Uniformed' was nothing I would
have used as praise; particularly as I cannot get used to the idea that
'uniform' equals 'company T-shirt'
Catja
Dan Goodman
See here: https://listserv.indiana.edu/archives/ballad-l.html
Dan Goodman
> Zeborah <zeb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Harry Erwin <her...@theworld.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Mary K. Kuhner <mkku...@kingman.gs.washington.edu> wrote:
>> [potential problems of brain-taping]
>> > > It's harder to imagine what the collision between a visual
>> > > thinker's skillset and a verbal or kinesthetic thinker's brain
>> > > would be, but I bet it would be "interesting". And consider an
>> > > olfactory or sonar-based learner!
>> >
>> > I've been avoiding getting involved in this discussion, mostly
>> > because this is related to my current research area. Let me put it
>> > this way-- it's a lot wierder than you think.
>>
>> Oh, the story ideas that arise!
>>
>> Zeborah
>
> I worry about the amount of neuroscience the reader would need to know
> to follow some of them. For example, we know mammals live in a _model_
> of the world that is only sparsely connected with reality.
The basic idea is fairly well-known; for example, every
mysticism-made-easy writer in the English-speaking world seems quite
aware of it.
> Synesthesia is only one of the weird phenomena that we encounter in
> our work.
1) What are others? 2) Can you give some references on the synesthesia?
While I probably couldn't make sense of them, there are people on the
synesthesia mailing list who probably could.
> My current research is trying to sort out some of the issues involving
> how we predict the trajectory of objects. It doesn't seem to involve
> vector representations, although I won't reject that approach
> completely until I've taken another look at Pribram's holonomic (or
> holographic) memory models.
--
Jacey Bedford
>Jacey Bedford <look...@nospam.invalid> wrote in
>> In message <Xns954C680FA76...@209.98.13.60>, Dan Goodman
>> <dsg...@visi.com> writes
>>>green...@cix.co.uk.invalid (Catja Pafort) wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dan wrote:
>>>>
>>>> To geographers, fiction writers, and people using more than one
>>>> language, a computer that tries to match everything you write with
>>>> its internal dictionary is going to cause more frustration than it
>>>> will provide help.
>>>
>>>On the Ballad-L list, there's a blind woman who studies Irish folk
>>>songs -- in both English and Gaelic. Her speech reader can't cope
>>>with two languages.
>>>
>> There's a Ballad-L list? What's the subscription information. Please?
>
>See here: https://listserv.indiana.edu/archives/ballad-l.html
>
Dan Goodman
@artifact.demon.co.uk:
> In message <Xns954D6286420...@209.98.13.60>, Dan Goodman
>>>>On the Ballad-L list, there's a blind woman who studies Irish folk
>>>>songs -- in both English and Gaelic. Her speech reader can't cope
>>>>with two languages.
>>>>
>>> There's a Ballad-L list? What's the subscription information. Please?
>>
>>See here: https://listserv.indiana.edu/archives/ballad-l.html
>>
> Thanks
Welcome. I look forward to seeing you on the list.
Harry Erwin
> her...@theworld.com (Harry Erwin) wrote in
>
> > Zeborah <zeb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Harry Erwin <her...@theworld.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Mary K. Kuhner <mkku...@kingman.gs.washington.edu> wrote:
> >> [potential problems of brain-taping]
> >> > > It's harder to imagine what the collision between a visual
> >> > > thinker's skillset and a verbal or kinesthetic thinker's brain
> >> > > would be, but I bet it would be "interesting". And consider an
> >> > > olfactory or sonar-based learner!
> >> >
> >> > I've been avoiding getting involved in this discussion, mostly
> >> > because this is related to my current research area. Let me put it
> >> > this way-- it's a lot wierder than you think.
> >>
> >> Oh, the story ideas that arise!
> >>
> >> Zeborah
> >
> > I worry about the amount of neuroscience the reader would need to know
> > to follow some of them. For example, we know mammals live in a _model_
> > of the world that is only sparsely connected with reality.
>
> The basic idea is fairly well-known; for example, every
> mysticism-made-easy writer in the English-speaking world seems quite
> aware of it.
Yes, but the world-view of the mystics has even less supporting
evidence.
>
> > Synesthesia is only one of the weird phenomena that we encounter in
> > our work.
>
> 1) What are others? 2) Can you give some references on the synesthesia?
> While I probably couldn't make sense of them, there are people on the
> synesthesia mailing list who probably could.
>
> > My current research is trying to sort out some of the issues involving
> > how we predict the trajectory of objects. It doesn't seem to involve
> > vector representations, although I won't reject that approach
> > completely until I've taken another look at Pribram's holonomic (or
> > holographic) memory models.
The best source for this sort of material are the books by Oliver Sacks.
Christof Koch has a recent text, Quest for Consciousness, that doesn't
require a PhD to understand.
Marilee J. Layman
The partial advantage of uniforms is that they identify the person as
working for that company. I hope the guy who comes to look at the
washer tomorrow (last week it spat sparks at me and tripped the
breaker) has not only a uniform, but a picture ID.
Zeborah
> I worry about the amount of neuroscience the reader would need to know
> to follow some of them. For example, we know mammals live in a _model_
> of the world that is only sparsely connected with reality.
I encountered the idea, at latest, in a first year philosophy class; so
it's something I can understand even if I couldn't go near proving it.
>Synesthesia
> is only one of the weird phenomena that we encounter in our work. My
> current research is trying to sort out some of the issues involving how
> we predict the trajectory of objects.
Clearly we construct quadratic equations in our head and solve them very
rapidly.
No?
>It doesn't seem to involve vector
> representations, although I won't reject that approach completely until
> I've taken another look at Pribram's holonomic (or holographic) memory
> models.
Um, yeah, I wouldn't want you to start using maths on me, that's quite
all right.
Dan Goodman
> Dan Goodman <dsg...@visi.com> wrote:
>> her...@theworld.com (Harry Erwin) wrote in
>> > Zeborah <zeb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> Harry Erwin <her...@theworld.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Mary K. Kuhner <mkku...@kingman.gs.washington.edu> wrote:
>> >> [potential problems of brain-taping]
>> >> > > It's harder to imagine what the collision between a visual
>> >> > > thinker's skillset and a verbal or kinesthetic thinker's brain
>> >> > > would be, but I bet it would be "interesting". And consider
>> >> > > an olfactory or sonar-based learner!
>> >> >
>> >> > I've been avoiding getting involved in this discussion, mostly
>> >> > because this is related to my current research area. Let me put
>> >> > it this way-- it's a lot wierder than you think.
>> >>
>> >> Oh, the story ideas that arise!
>> >>
>> >> Zeborah
>> >
>> > I worry about the amount of neuroscience the reader would need to
>> > know to follow some of them. For example, we know mammals live in a
>> > _model_ of the world that is only sparsely connected with reality.
>>
>> The basic idea is fairly well-known; for example, every
>> mysticism-made-easy writer in the English-speaking world seems quite
>> aware of it.
>
> Yes, but the world-view of the mystics has even less supporting
> evidence.
But -- many mystics access reality directly! Would you doubt their
word?
>> > Synesthesia is only one of the weird phenomena that we encounter in
>> > our work.
>>
>> 1) What are others? 2) Can you give some references on the
>> synesthesia? While I probably couldn't make sense of them, there are
>> people on the synesthesia mailing list who probably could.
>>
>> > My current research is trying to sort out some of the issues
>> > involving how we predict the trajectory of objects. It doesn't seem
>> > to involve vector representations, although I won't reject that
>> > approach completely until I've taken another look at Pribram's
>> > holonomic (or holographic) memory models.
>
> The best source for this sort of material are the books by Oliver
> Sacks. Christof Koch has a recent text, Quest for Consciousness, that
> doesn't require a PhD to understand.
Thanks!
Elizabeth
<news:cft459$ntv$1...@panix3.panix.com>:
> A correctly spelled word that is not the one the author intended
> to use? Not one that sounds the same but something totally unrelated,
> like dog for god or from for for.
I call them typos, because I think they come from my fingers, not my brain.
Either they start with the same few letters or I reverse part of the word
or something.
--
Elizabeth
polly.callan at earthlink dot net
http://home.earthlink.net/~polly.callan
http://www.livejournal.com/users/pollyc/
Mary Gentle
(Zeborah) wrote:
> Harry Erwin <her...@theworld.com> wrote:
>
> > I worry about the amount of neuroscience the reader would need to know
> > to follow some of them. For example, we know mammals live in a _model_
> > of the world that is only sparsely connected with reality.
>
> I encountered the idea, at latest, in a first year philosophy class; so
> it's something I can understand even if I couldn't go near proving it.
It's all in Plato - goodness me, what do they teach children nowadays? <g>
Mary
Most recently published:
1610: A SUNDIAL IN A GRAVE, novel, Orion UK, hc & tpb
CARTOMANCY, short story collection, Orion UK, pb
Catja Pafort
> For example, we know mammals live in a _model_
> of the world that is only sparsely connected with reality.
So do we.
Two different revelations have driven that home to me. One is how you
notice the world differently when you have reason to - if you're in a
good mood, or hoping to meet friendly people, or if you've just bought a
new car in a different colour, you will generally find a world that
matches your expectations.
The other was playing intensively over several days a game using a
certain style of cartoon landscapes and characters, and finding that my
brain was adopting it for my dreams; I had absolutely *no* reality
filter installed, to my subconscious it was as 'real' as the world
outside my window would be.
It stands to reason that we get way too many triggers to process them
all, so we pick the ones that seem to work best for us. It is also known
(from rasfc conversations, for instance) that people experience the
world differently - to me, for instance, alcohol is *always* bitter, no
matter what form its served in; and if people didn't tell me
convincingly that they like the taste of various drinks, I would not
believe that anyone could, as the bitterness is overpowering. (I do like
the _smell_ of a number of alcoholic drinks; so I can abstract - if
things tasted like they smell, they would be pleasant)
Catja
Harry Erwin
> Harry Erwin <her...@theworld.com> wrote:
>
> > I worry about the amount of neuroscience the reader would need to know
> > to follow some of them. For example, we know mammals live in a _model_
> > of the world that is only sparsely connected with reality.
>
> I encountered the idea, at latest, in a first year philosophy class; so
> it's something I can understand even if I couldn't go near proving it.
Philosophers <sniff!>. The model isn't anything your average philosopher
would come up with.
>
> >Synesthesia
> > is only one of the weird phenomena that we encounter in our work. My
> > current research is trying to sort out some of the issues involving how
> > we predict the trajectory of objects.
>
> Clearly we construct quadratic equations in our head and solve them very
> rapidly.
>
> No?
That involves productive speech and formal learning--it doesn't come
naturally. Bats predict trajectories, and very few of them have taken
GCSE maths.
>
> >It doesn't seem to involve vector
> > representations, although I won't reject that approach completely until
> > I've taken another look at Pribram's holonomic (or holographic) memory
> > models.
>
> Um, yeah, I wouldn't want you to start using maths on me, that's quite
> all right.
>
> Zeborah
--
Harry Erwin
Jonathan L Cunningham
>Harry Erwin <her...@theworld.com> wrote:
(snip)
>> My
>> current research is trying to sort out some of the issues involving how
>> we predict the trajectory of objects.
>
>Clearly we construct quadratic equations in our head and solve them very
>rapidly.
>
>No?
The way I'd design it, using neurons, is to store a big look-up table,
indexed by position and speed. Neural nets (loosely inspired by what
we know about real neurons) are very good for that kind of thing, and
also very good at interpolating smoothly between similar
situations[1].
If you've ever played any computer games too much, with lots of things
moving around that you have to pay close attention to, you'll "see"
their trajectories when you close your eyes (after you stop playing).
And it will work even if the motion can't be described by quadratic
equations.
To train the net, you'd need to do things like watch people playing
ball games, dropping things, etc. Basically, a human child would
have to keep its eyes open for several days, at least. It should
be possible to fit "keep eyes open" for a few days into their
schedule *some* time between birth and adulthood.
Now Harry can go away and do the experiments :-). (Although he did
say "some of the issues" which sounds like something more specific
than a general mechanism.)
It would be interesting to raise someone in zero g, and then see
how long it took them to learn to, say, catch a ball on Mars. You
might have difficulty keeping them alive and non-jellyfish-oid,
but that's a detail.
Jonathan
[1] It's one of the few things they *are* good for :-).
Harry Erwin
> On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 09:24:29 +1200, zeb...@gmail.com (Zeborah) wrote:
>
> >Harry Erwin <her...@theworld.com> wrote:
>
> (snip)
> >> My
> >> current research is trying to sort out some of the issues involving how
> >> we predict the trajectory of objects.
> >
> >Clearly we construct quadratic equations in our head and solve them very
> >rapidly.
> >
> >No?
>
> The way I'd design it, using neurons, is to store a big look-up table,
> indexed by position and speed. Neural nets (loosely inspired by what
> we know about real neurons) are very good for that kind of thing, and
> also very good at interpolating smoothly between similar
> situations[1].
That works--I have a paper coming out in December--but the size of the
table is very big, and the computation can't involve displacements.
Instead, it has to be a local integration or possibly something in
frequency space.
>
> If you've ever played any computer games too much, with lots of things
> moving around that you have to pay close attention to, you'll "see"
> their trajectories when you close your eyes (after you stop playing).
>
> And it will work even if the motion can't be described by quadratic
> equations.
>
> To train the net, you'd need to do things like watch people playing
> ball games, dropping things, etc. Basically, a human child would
> have to keep its eyes open for several days, at least. It should
> be possible to fit "keep eyes open" for a few days into their
> schedule *some* time between birth and adulthood.
>
> Now Harry can go away and do the experiments :-). (Although he did
> say "some of the issues" which sounds like something more specific
> than a general mechanism.)
>
> It would be interesting to raise someone in zero g, and then see
> how long it took them to learn to, say, catch a ball on Mars. You
> might have difficulty keeping them alive and non-jellyfish-oid,
> but that's a detail.
The relevant bat experiment was done in the 60s. It takes just a few
stimulus presentations for the bat to figure out that gravity no longer
has its effect.
>
> Jonathan
> [1] It's one of the few things they *are* good for :-).
You sound like an engineer. Biological neural networks are a good deal
more competent than back-prop or even integrate-and-fire.
Jonathan L Cunningham
wrote:
>Jonathan L Cunningham <sp...@softluck.plus.com> wrote:
(neural nets)
>> [1] It's one of the few things they *are* good for :-).
>
>You sound like an engineer. Biological neural networks are a good deal
>more competent than back-prop or even integrate-and-fire.
Background in AI. Mainly symbolic AI, but in the 90s I had to be
more familiar with neural networks, and what their problems are, than
I really wanted to be :-). And yes, I'd expect a biological
network to be far more capable than a typical "neural net" done
in software (or on silicon, since you can get hardware implementations
of them).
The latest I heard, it's even thought now that the glial cells are
more than just a support structure, and take part in the processing.
Whether that's true or not, even with just the neurons, what's going
on is *far* more complex than "neural net" in the comp. sci. sense.
So, because of my background/experiences I'd tend to use "network
of neurons" in the one case, and "connectionist architecture" in
the other to avoid ambiguity. And anything I could design a
connectionist machine to do, I'd expect a biological system to
do more easily (but slower). At the detailed level, it then
becomes interesting what sneaky tricks a biological solution is
implementing, that can't be done easily using the simplified
software models.
Jonathan
Harry Erwin
> On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 12:17:31 +0100, her...@theworld.com (Harry Erwin)
> wrote:
>
> >Jonathan L Cunningham <sp...@softluck.plus.com> wrote:
>
> (neural nets)
> >> [1] It's one of the few things they *are* good for :-).
> >
> >You sound like an engineer. Biological neural networks are a good deal
> >more competent than back-prop or even integrate-and-fire.
>
> Background in AI. Mainly symbolic AI, but in the 90s I had to be
> more familiar with neural networks, and what their problems are, than
> I really wanted to be :-). And yes, I'd expect a biological
> network to be far more capable than a typical "neural net" done
> in software (or on silicon, since you can get hardware implementations
> of them).
>
> The latest I heard, it's even thought now that the glial cells are
> more than just a support structure, and take part in the processing.
They don't process action potentials, but that doesn't prevent them from
getting involved in neuromodulation
>
> Whether that's true or not, even with just the neurons, what's going
> on is *far* more complex than "neural net" in the comp. sci. sense.
>
> So, because of my background/experiences I'd tend to use "network
> of neurons" in the one case, and "connectionist architecture" in
> the other to avoid ambiguity. And anything I could design a
> connectionist machine to do, I'd expect a biological system to
> do more easily (but slower). At the detailed level, it then
> becomes interesting what sneaky tricks a biological solution is
> implementing, that can't be done easily using the simplified
> software models.
Start with integrate and fire in the dendrites (i.e., active
conductances), allowing one cortical neuron to remember many, many
patterns and respond to the presentation of any of them. Next consider
bistable neurons--that can shift from being quiet to persistant activity
and back based on control inputs--these include most pyramidal cells and
form the basis of short term memory. What about spike-timing dependent
plasticity (involving NMDA receptors)? Neuromodulation (nicotinic and
muscarinic ACh receptors, all the dopamine receptor types, 5HT
(serotonin), noradrenalin, oxytocin, etc.). Motion-sensitive neurons
(these use arrays of delay lines). Delay-sensitive neurons (these use
conductances with slow dynamics). Coincidence detector neurons
(hyperpolarized until the coincidence interval, then become very
sensitive). Match/mismatch processing (timing of inputs). Denoising
(involving fast inhibitory interneurons). Integrator neurons (the output
measures the cumulative sum of inputs). Contrast detectors (cortical
microcircuits involving both excitatory and inhibitory neurons).
>
> Jonathan
Marilee J. Layman
(Catja Pafort) wrote:
>Harry Erwin wrote:
>
>> For example, we know mammals live in a _model_
>> of the world that is only sparsely connected with reality.
>
>So do we.
Well, we *are* mammals.
nyra
>
> On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 08:08:51 +0100, green...@cix.co.uk.invalid
> (Catja Pafort) wrote:
>
> >Harry Erwin wrote:
> >
> >> For example, we know mammals live in a _model_
> >> of the world that is only sparsely connected with reality.
> >
> >So do we.
>
> Well, we *are* mammals.
Except for the cephalopods among us.
<ssssslurrrrrrp>
--
"Der Sultan hat soviel Weisheit in seinem Hauptganglion wie ich in
meiner Pigmentdrüse."
- Cthulhu über Azathoth
John F. Eldredge
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 21:30:52 +0200, nyra <ny...@gmx.net> wrote:
>"Marilee J. Layman" schrieb:
>>
>> On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 08:08:51 +0100, green...@cix.co.uk.invalid
>> (Catja Pafort) wrote:
>>
>> >Harry Erwin wrote:
>> >
>> >> For example, we know mammals live in a _model_
>> >> of the world that is only sparsely connected with reality.
>> >
>> >So do we.
>>
>> Well, we *are* mammals.
>
>Except for the cephalopods among us.
><ssssslurrrrrrp>
Ah. I take it that R'lyeh now has Internet service (probably by
tapping into underwater cables).
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 7.0.3 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
iQA/AwUBQSpNUjMYPge5L34aEQISJwCg3I8YLLB/320GhM6E3MRfmEzPgJoAoJTu
blpKsTo/9m3vHV+YyVAXgiw/
=Zn6Z
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
John F. Eldredge -- jo...@jfeldredge.com
PGP key available from http://pgp.mit.edu
"Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better
than not to think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria
Pat Bowne
"Harry Erwin" <her...@theworld.com> wrote
>
> They don't process action potentials, but that doesn't prevent them from
> getting involved in neuromodulation
>
I read a paper last year suggesting that glial cells removed the transient
K+ increase generated just outside a depolarizing neuron, and actually
moved the K+ some distance through the cortex. Know anything about this?
Pat
Zeborah
> It would be interesting to raise someone in zero g, and then see
> how long it took them to learn to, say, catch a ball on Mars. You
> might have difficulty keeping them alive and non-jellyfish-oid,
> but that's a detail.
ObSF: Er, something by Asimov. Armchair detective. Bell-flowers?
Langford!
Dorothy J Heydt
Zeborah <zeb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Jonathan L Cunningham <sp...@softluck.plus.com> wrote:
>
>> It would be interesting to raise someone in zero g, and then see
>> how long it took them to learn to, say, catch a ball on Mars. You
>> might have difficulty keeping them alive and non-jellyfish-oid,
>> but that's a detail.
>
>ObSF: Er, something by Asimov. Armchair detective. Bell-flowers?
>Langford!
Wendell Urth. "The Singing Bell." I misremember any Langford.
Dorothy J. Heydt
Albany, California
djh...@kithrup.com
Zeborah
> In article <1gj0isg.1w143xblxcg72N%zeb...@gmail.com>,
> Zeborah <zeb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >ObSF: Er, something by Asimov. Armchair detective. Bell-flowers?
> >Langford!
>
> Wendell Urth. "The Singing Bell."
Thanks.
>I misremember any Langford.
No, that was a summons. It works when Julian does it.
Harry Erwin
Not much. Which journal?
Note that the experiments are very hard to do.
David Langford
>Dorothy J Heydt <djh...@kithrup.com> wrote:
>
>> In article <1gj0isg.1w143xblxcg72N%zeb...@gmail.com>,
>> Zeborah <zeb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >ObSF: Er, something by Asimov. Armchair detective. Bell-flowers?
>> >Langford!
>>
>> Wendell Urth. "The Singing Bell."
>
>Thanks.
>
>>I misremember any Langford.
>
>No, that was a summons. It works when Julian does it.
I was away, being one of the lesser guests at the Discworld convention.
Four days of wall-to-wall Terry Pratchett....
Dave
--
David Langford
http://ansible.co.uk/
Latest book: =Different Kinds of Darkness= (collection, Cosmos, 2004)
sharkey
>
> I was away, being one of the lesser guests at the Discworld convention.
> Four days of wall-to-wall Terry Pratchett....
It must be hell in there. Hard on Terry, too. I hope people
at least wiped their feet.
-----sharks
Marilee J. Layman
She's summoning Langford to answer. There were more than just that
story about Urth.
Marilee J. Layman
wrote:
>On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 21:40:45 +1200, zeb...@gmail.com (Zeborah) wrote:
>
>>Dorothy J Heydt <djh...@kithrup.com> wrote:
>>
>>> In article <1gj0isg.1w143xblxcg72N%zeb...@gmail.com>,
>>> Zeborah <zeb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >ObSF: Er, something by Asimov. Armchair detective. Bell-flowers?
>>> >Langford!
>>>
>>> Wendell Urth. "The Singing Bell."
>>
>>Thanks.
>>
>>>I misremember any Langford.
>>
>>No, that was a summons. It works when Julian does it.
>
>I was away, being one of the lesser guests at the Discworld convention.
>Four days of wall-to-wall Terry Pratchett....
I get that next year at Minicon. Well, I don't know when *Terry* is
getting in, but most of us make it a six-day con.
Brooks Moses
> Darn! You're right. I just went and looked up "homonym" thinking that
> James meant things like "there" instead of "their" but he does say
> "Not one that sounds the same".
>
> What do you call it when you read a correctly spelled word that is not
> the one the author wrote? :-).
To wackyparse, usually. Usage: "I wackyparsed that as 'a correctly
spilled word'."
I don't know that I've seen this outside of a particular strange little
enclave of Backwater Just Off Usenet that I happen to inhabit, though.
- Brooks
--
The "bmoses-nospam" address is valid; no unmunging needed.
Anna Mazzoldi
> Jonathan L Cunningham wrote:
>> Darn! You're right. I just went and looked up "homonym" thinking that
>> James meant things like "there" instead of "their" but he does say
>> "Not one that sounds the same".
>>
>> What do you call it when you read a correctly spelled word that is not
>> the one the author wrote? :-).
>
> To wackyparse, usually. Usage: "I wackyparsed that as 'a correctly
> spilled word'."
>
> I don't know that I've seen this outside of a particular strange little
> enclave of Backwater Just Off Usenet that I happen to inhabit, though.
Ooohh, shiny! New word! And for something that I do all the time, too! (To
my eyes, for example, Dublin is full of vans that proudly announce their
job as "Shoplifters". I don't know what it is about the word
"shopfitters"...) <g>
--
Anna Mazzoldi <http://aynathie.livejournal.com/>
If I could tell you what it meant,
there would be no point in dancing it.
-- Isadora Duncan
Dan Goodman
> On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 12:45:50 -0700, Brooks Moses wrote:
>
>> Jonathan L Cunningham wrote:
>>> Darn! You're right. I just went and looked up "homonym" thinking
>>> that James meant things like "there" instead of "their" but he does
>>> say "Not one that sounds the same".
>>>
>>> What do you call it when you read a correctly spelled word that is
>>> not the one the author wrote? :-).
>>
>> To wackyparse, usually. Usage: "I wackyparsed that as 'a correctly
>> spilled word'."
>>
>> I don't know that I've seen this outside of a particular strange
>> little enclave of Backwater Just Off Usenet that I happen to inhabit,
>> though.
>
> Ooohh, shiny! New word! And for something that I do all the time, too!
> (To my eyes, for example, Dublin is full of vans that proudly announce
> their job as "Shoplifters". I don't know what it is about the word
> "shopfitters"...) <g>
Couple of recent ones of mine:
Reincarnation Catholic Church.
In the window of a bar: Cash Recycling.
Fantasy book title: Castle of Liver.
Catja Pafort
>Castle of Liver
There's a pub round these parts, the Liver Inn, which got some weird
looks on my parts when I first saw that sign.
It is, however, pronounced with 'i' as in 'I' not as the organ,
and refers to the breed of sheep.
Ok, so 'these parts' are a bit weird...
Catja
Anna Mazzoldi
Well, until relatively recently, crossing O'Connell Bridge to go Southside
I couldn't help noticing the large sign on a building saying "Royal Liver"
-- and think of the Queen Mother. :-)
--
Anna Mazzoldi <http://aynathie.livejournal.com/>
"Why did the chicken cross the road?"
Hippocrates: "Because of an excess of light pink gooey
stuff in its pancreas."
Helen Hall
I've never heard of a Liver sheep, though I have heard of (and seen) a
Liver Bird. They're on the Liver building on the waterfront at
Liverpool.
Helen
--
Helen Hall ** Wales ** http://www.baradel.demon.co.uk/