2010 entry list
Bob Dubery
12 teams on it, though a 13th may be added.
Manor have been renamed "Virgin Racing".
Only one seat confirmed at Torro Rosso.
Ferrari still linked to a ciggy company's name.
Toyota are deemed to be required to put an entry forward but have not
done so to date.
APLer
news:306a1005-e99c-4418...@r24g2000yqd.googlegroups.com:
> http://www.f1sa.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=19137&Itemi
> d=219
>
> 12 teams on it, though a 13th may be added.
>
> Manor have been renamed "Virgin Racing".
>
> Only one seat confirmed at Torro Rosso.
>
> Ferrari still linked to a ciggy company's name.
>
> Toyota are deemed to be required to put an entry forward but have not
> done so to date.
>
Heidfeld better scramble if he want's a half decent seat next year.
Apparently my earlier statement about Rubens resigning himself to
Coultard's old role - but with Williams is the case. Hulkenburg certainly
has potential. 10 podiums with 5 wins last year in GP2. Wonder who Renault
are going to get? That's the last decent seat other than Brawn.
Chad
Wonder why Campos' constructor name doesn't include the engine supplier
name. Thought that was specified in the rules somewhere.
And USF1 get the lucky number 22 plate.
--
Chad
Bigbird
The two seats not currently on the list will be decent seats.
--
Bigbird
#
As for my humour:
I am like an artist who's work isn't fully appreciated until he's
shuffled off this mortal coil.
You'll be laughing when I'm dead!
Shevek
> http://www.f1sa.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=19137&Itemid=219
>
> 12 teams on it, though a 13th may be added.
>
> Manor have been renamed "Virgin Racing".
>
> Only one seat confirmed at Torro Rosso.
>
For Cliff's sake! It's ToRo Rosso, with just one 'r'! You only had to
read the list you posted!
Whys is that people have so much difficulty spelling "Toro", "Rubens" or
"Jenson"? I would assume that most fans would have read the names many
times, but many keep making mistakes.
--
Shevek
build
> The two seats not currently on the list will be decent seats.
> --
> Bigbird
More than a few are saying that. And, might be four.
beers,
build
AC
"Shevek" <shev...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7nk3v2F...@mid.individual.net...
But in each case every one pretty much understands, and ultimately that's
all that matters. Posting to Usenet is not an exam and posts are often
written in a hurry. Also, never forget the oddities of spell checkers.
Must confess, the only reason I check spelling ,etc, is to avoid people who
get all precious about it. Not saying you are, but on some NGs I post to
there are those who's only argument is spelling and grammar nitpicking. I
suppose the language fascists can claim a victory there, hmmmmm.
AC
Bob Dubery
> Bob Dubery escribió:
>
> >http://www.f1sa.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=19137&I...
>
> > 12 teams on it, though a 13th may be added.
>
> > Manor have been renamed "Virgin Racing".
>
> > Only one seat confirmed at Torro Rosso.
>
> For Cliff's sake! It's ToRo Rosso, with just one 'r'! You only had to
> read the list you posted!
>
> Whys is that people have so much difficulty spelling "Toro", "Rubens" or
> "Jenson"? I would assume that most fans would have read the names many
> times, but many keep making mistakes.
Try to stick to the important things. Like will Jim Clarke or Jacqui
Stuart get the remaining seat at Torro Roso? Jensen and Rubins would
have made a good pear, but that's knot two bee.
Mike
> Bob Dubery escribió:
>
> >http://www.f1sa.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=19137&I...
>
>
> > Manor have been renamed "Virgin Racing".
>
> > Only one seat confirmed at Torro Rosso.
>
> For Cliff's sake! It's ToRo Rosso, with just one 'r'! You only had to
> read the list you posted!
>
> Whys is that people have so much difficulty spelling "Toro", "Rubens" or
> "Jenson"? I would assume that most fans would have read the names many
> times, but many keep making mistakes.
So what!
Chad
>>
>>> http://www.f1sa.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=19137&I...
>>
>>> 12 teams on it, though a 13th may be added.
>>
>>> Manor have been renamed "Virgin Racing".
>>
>>> Only one seat confirmed at Torro Rosso.
>>
>> For Cliff's sake! It's ToRo Rosso, with just one 'r'! You only had to
>> read the list you posted!
>>
>> Whys is that people have so much difficulty spelling "Toro",
>> "Rubens" or "Jenson"? I would assume that most fans would have read
>> the names many times, but many keep making mistakes.
>
> So what!
Maybe Shevek is just upset that no one care enough to correct his grammer in
the "How do you call a person who speaks 2 languages" joke yesterday. ;-)
--
Chad
Mike
> Mike wrote:
> > On Dec 1, 8:54 am, Shevek <sheve...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>>http://www.f1sa.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=19137&I...
>
> >>> 12 teams on it, though a 13th may be added.
>
> >>> Manor have been renamed "Virgin Racing".
>
> >>> Only one seat confirmed at Torro Rosso.
>
> >> For Cliff's sake! It's ToRo Rosso, with just one 'r'! You only had to
> >> read the list you posted!
>
> >> Whys is that people have so much difficulty spelling "Toro",
> >> "Rubens" or "Jenson"? I would assume that most fans would have read
> >> the names many times, but many keep making mistakes.
>
> > So what!
>
> Maybe Shevek is just upset that no one care enough to correct his grammer in
> the "How do you call a person who speaks 2 languages" joke yesterday. ;-)
Mmm, not sure what his Grandmother had to do with it.
;)
Chad
> On Dec 1, 1:14 pm, "Chad" <cbs...@safemail.com> wrote:
>> Mike wrote:
>>> On Dec 1, 8:54 am, Shevek <sheve...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>> http://www.f1sa.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=19137&I...
>>
>>>>> 12 teams on it, though a 13th may be added.
>>
>>>>> Manor have been renamed "Virgin Racing".
>>
>>>>> Only one seat confirmed at Torro Rosso.
>>
>>>> For Cliff's sake! It's ToRo Rosso, with just one 'r'! You only had
>>>> to read the list you posted!
>>
>>>> Whys is that people have so much difficulty spelling "Toro",
>>>> "Rubens" or "Jenson"? I would assume that most fans would have read
>>>> the names many times, but many keep making mistakes.
>>
>>> So what!
>>
>> Maybe Shevek is just upset that no one care enough to correct his
>> grammer in the "How do you call a person who speaks 2 languages"
>> joke yesterday. ;-)
>
> Mmm, not sure what his Grandmother had to do with it.
> ;)
oops LOL
--
Chad
Shevek
For Cliff's sake! It's "grammAr", not grammer. It's not so difficult!
--
Shevek
Mike
> Mike wrote:
> > On Dec 1, 1:14 pm, "Chad" <cbs...@safemail.com> wrote:
> >> Mike wrote:
> >>> On Dec 1, 8:54 am, Shevek <sheve...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>>http://www.f1sa.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=19137&I...
>
> >>>>> 12 teams on it, though a 13th may be added.
>
> >>>>> Manor have been renamed "Virgin Racing".
>
> >>>>> Only one seat confirmed at Torro Rosso.
>
> >>>> For Cliff's sake! It's ToRo Rosso, with just one 'r'! You only had
> >>>> to read the list you posted!
>
> >>>> Whys is that people have so much difficulty spelling "Toro",
> >>>> "Rubens" or "Jenson"? I would assume that most fans would have read
> >>>> the names many times, but many keep making mistakes.
>
> >>> So what!
>
> >> Maybe Shevek is just upset that no one care enough to correct his
> >> grammer in the "How do you call a person who speaks 2 languages"
> >> joke yesterday. ;-)
>
> > Mmm, not sure what his Grandmother had to do with it.
> > ;)
>
> oops LOL
Ha, I try NEVER to pick people up on grammar, spelling or anything
else as I'm no better myself.
I just thought being as what this threadlet is about i'd chime in for
once :D
ric zito
> > For Cliff's sake! It's ToRo Rosso, with just one 'r'! You only had to read
> > the list you posted!
> >
> > Whys is that people have so much difficulty spelling "Toro", "Rubens" or
> > "Jenson"? I would assume that most fans would have read the names many
> > times, but many keep making mistakes.
> >
> > --
> > Shevek
>
> But in each case every one pretty much understands, and ultimately that's
> all that matters.
That isn't entirely untrue, but it's a crying shame nonetheless. That's
the very reasoning used by my son's generation to justify their
appalling spelling. Their French (English too?) spelling and grammar has
been deteriorating for years on the back of the sloppiness and laziness
which that idea promotes.
Their average writing ability is perhaps 30-40% worse than that of my
generation at their age (I'm 49, he's 17), according to teachers and
professors I've spoken to. That's a huge, not to say catastrophic drop
in only 30-odd years.
--
ric
ric at pixelligence dot com
Mark
> AC <x...@xxx.xxx> wrote:
>>
>> But in each case every one pretty much understands, and ultimately that's
>> all that matters.
>
> That isn't entirely untrue, but it's a crying shame nonetheless. That's
> the very reasoning used by my son's generation to justify their
> appalling spelling. Their French (English too?) spelling and grammar has
> been deteriorating for years on the back of the sloppiness and laziness
> which that idea promotes.
>
> Their average writing ability is perhaps 30-40% worse than that of my
> generation at their age (I'm 49, he's 17), according to teachers and
> professors I've spoken to. That's a huge, not to say catastrophic drop
> in only 30-odd years.
Totally agreed. The problem with "but everyone pretty much understands"
only works when there is an agreed standard from which things deviate.
Lots of people are now using phonetic spelling - fair enough, you might
think, but the pronunciation varies wildly and, hence, so does the
phonetic spelling. If there is no agreed standard or the number of
people using it/recognising it falls below a certain level, I suspect
the "but everyone pretty much understands it" argument completely falls
apart.
Having a benchmark against which to measure compliance/non-compliance
stops that deviation from spreading to the point where it's too great
for mutual comprehension.
Add up:
- Poor and/or non-standard spelling ("what does it matter if the
words aren't right/we use txtspk?")
- Non-existent or mis-applied punctuation ("those characters are a
waste of time"*)
- no understanding of the structure or purpose of sentence/paragraph
formation
* Something said by those who don't understand what punctuation does.
and you have a recipe for confusion. We struggle to read 300 year old
manuscripts and need expert help when you get to 500 years and beyond.
I suspect that there are things being written today which won't be
properly understood within my lifetime because they are so dependent on
short-lived, localised cultural context.
The primary purpose of language is to be understood. If the piece is
transitory and you don't care if you are understood outside of a time
and a place, perhaps it doesn't matter. For anything important, though,
particularly in an international forum (like this), I think people
should attempt to adhere to rules which help the reader understand.
Using the "accepted" rules is one way of doing that.
[ for Phil: A good counter-example is Nilges who insists on using
archaic language (often wrongly) and overly florid constructs in order
to pretend they are masters of language when they're actually hiding
the lack of substance in their posts. ]
Andrew Smallshaw
> Whys is that people have so much difficulty spelling "Toro", "Rubens" or
> "Jenson"? I would assume that most fans would have read the names many
> times, but many keep making mistakes.
You missed the single most annoying error. Many times here I have
seen people act like they know what they are talking about but then
start discussing "MacClaren", whoever they are.
Sure we can all watch TV broadcasts and regurgitate what the
commentators have said, but if you want to pretend you know your
stuff your research needs to go a bit further than that. If it
has not progressed to the point where you have seen written references
to one of the big teams sufficently to know how to spell their name
then your opinion probably isn't worth listening to.
--
Andrew Smallshaw
and...@sdf.lonestar.org
Mark
> Mark wrote...
>> and you have a recipe for confusion. We struggle to read 300 year old
>> manuscripts and need expert help when you get to 500 years and beyond.
>> I suspect that there are things being written today which won't be
>> properly understood within my lifetime because they are so dependent on
>> short-lived, localised cultural context.
>
> When books and newspapers succumb to texttalk, you can start to worry.
I have given up on newspapers. Seriously, the standard of english is
lamentable. It's not textspeak, but it's not far off in some cases.
And I'm not just talking about tabloids.
>> The primary purpose of language is to be understood. If the piece is
>> transitory and you don't care if you are understood outside of a time
>> and a place, perhaps it doesn't matter. For anything important, though,
>> particularly in an international forum (like this),
>
> You're suggesting this group is *important*?
Heh - you have to dream. ;-)
In the case of rasf1, I was talking about its international nature
rather than the historic, cultural or similar importance. Okay, it's an
english-speaking newsgroup, but I think it's only fair to try to use
reasonable english for those for whom english is not their first
language.
In fairness, though, there's an argument that it's the native speakers
who are the worst offenders for bad english.
>> I think people
>> should attempt to adhere to rules which help the reader understand.
>> Using the "accepted" rules is one way of doing that.
>
> Have you forgotten that Usenet abbreviations are the basis of texttalk?
> http://css.sbcma.com/timj/acronyms/
> These 'rules' often only apply to English as written and used in the UK.
> Some poor sod struggling to post here from Poland is never going to get
> his head around some of our daft punctuation.
Oh, I watched that develop from the late '80s (the length of time I've
been on usenet). I don't have to agree with it, though.
Frank Adam
<sp...@not.welcome.here.ac.uk> wrote:
>I have given up on newspapers. Seriously, the standard of english is
>lamentable. It's not textspeak, but it's not far off in some cases.
>
Ahh, so it's your fault that we will be paying for just about every
word on the nets soon. Murdoch was in an interview a month or so ago
and he is pretty adement that all serious papers will be electronic
based and pay per view within 10 years. They're apparently working to
do that now. It'll be cheaper, but finding stuff on Google will be
harder as they want to block the bots, so poeple will have to go to
their site and pay to search for anything..
>In the case of rasf1, I was talking about its international nature
>rather than the historic, cultural or similar importance. Okay, it's an
>english-speaking newsgroup, but I think it's only fair to try to use
>reasonable english for those for whom english is not their first
>language.
>
>In fairness, though, there's an argument that it's the native speakers
>who are the worst offenders for bad english.
>
Yebut now that we have a word for it(deslecsia) it's almost cool.
I mean just look at Stewart. You know, he was a 3 times world champ,
but who cares. He is dyslexic. Yes it's true, just like Einstein was.
;-)
>> Have you forgotten that Usenet abbreviations are the basis of texttalk?
>> http://css.sbcma.com/timj/acronyms/
>> These 'rules' often only apply to English as written and used in the UK.
>> Some poor sod struggling to post here from Poland is never going to get
>> his head around some of our daft punctuation.
>
>Oh, I watched that develop from the late '80s (the length of time I've
>been on usenet). I don't have to agree with it, though.
>
Oh i don't know. Acronyms have been around since the FIDO days, anyone
who rocks into a newsgroup would be half aware of them. If not they
can ask. Similar ones are used in forums too, so shouldn't really
phase most people who are active on the net.
And newbies will adapt, or as usual, we will kill them. :)
--
Regards, Frank
ric zito
> > and you have a recipe for confusion. We struggle to read 300 year old
> > manuscripts and need expert help when you get to 500 years and beyond.
> > I suspect that there are things being written today which won't be
> > properly understood within my lifetime because they are so dependent on
> > short-lived, localised cultural context.
>
> Written where? Bog walls?
> When books and newspapers succumb to texttalk, you can start to worry.
The point is, the people who will be writing those newspapers and books
within a few years are of my son's generation...
Mark
> On Tue, 1 Dec 2009 17:49:13 +0000 (UTC), Mark
> <sp...@not.welcome.here.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>>I have given up on newspapers. Seriously, the standard of english is
>>lamentable. It's not textspeak, but it's not far off in some cases.
>
> Ahh, so it's your fault that we will be paying for just about every
> word on the nets soon. Murdoch was in an interview a month or so ago
> and he is pretty adement that all serious papers will be electronic
> based and pay per view within 10 years. They're apparently working to
> do that now. It'll be cheaper, but finding stuff on Google will be
> harder as they want to block the bots, so poeple will have to go to
> their site and pay to search for anything..
Nah - that's just Murdoch.
He want to charge for everything, and he'd (ideally) like to have a
straight monopoly. If he can't have that, he's content with a
stranglehold on media such that it may as well be a monopoly.
Dealing in free content isn't part of the plan.
But it's nothing to do with me. I actually buy a newspaper
semi-regularly, but I find myself getting annoyed with the quality of
the journalism (and not just the english). A few years ago, I always
bought a newspaper. Now, it's probably two or three days a week.
>>Oh, I watched that develop from the late '80s (the length of time I've
>>been on usenet). I don't have to agree with it, though.
>
> Oh i don't know. Acronyms have been around since the FIDO days, anyone
> who rocks into a newsgroup would be half aware of them. If not they
> can ask. Similar ones are used in forums too, so shouldn't really
> phase most people who are active on the net.
> And newbies will adapt, or as usual, we will kill them. :)
I didn't say it originated on usenet, just that that's where I watched
it develop. I didn't have anything to do with fidonet.
Chad
> On Dec 1, 2:15 pm, "Chad" <cbs...@safemail.com> wrote:
>> Mike wrote:
>>> On Dec 1, 1:14 pm, "Chad" <cbs...@safemail.com> wrote:
>>>> Mike wrote:
>>>>> On Dec 1, 8:54 am, Shevek <sheve...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>> http://www.f1sa.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=19137&I...
>>
>>>>>>> 12 teams on it, though a 13th may be added.
>>
>>>>>>> Manor have been renamed "Virgin Racing".
>>
>>>>>>> Only one seat confirmed at Torro Rosso.
>>
>>>>>> For Cliff's sake! It's ToRo Rosso, with just one 'r'! You only
>>>>>> had to read the list you posted!
>>
>>>>>> Whys is that people have so much difficulty spelling "Toro",
>>>>>> "Rubens" or "Jenson"? I would assume that most fans would have
>>>>>> read the names many times, but many keep making mistakes.
>>
>>>>> So what!
>>
>>>> Maybe Shevek is just upset that no one care enough to correct his
>>>> grammer in the "How do you call a person who speaks 2 languages"
>>>> joke yesterday. ;-)
>>
>>> Mmm, not sure what his Grandmother had to do with it.
>>> ;)
>>
>> oops LOL
>
> Ha, I try NEVER to pick people up on grammar, spelling or anything
> else as I'm no better myself.
> I just thought being as what this threadlet is about i'd chime in for
> once :D
I think there is some interwebs law that says anyone who turns pedant on
spelling/grammar is 90% likely to make an error in that post themselves. :p
--
Chad
Chad
> The primary purpose of language is to be understood. If the piece is
> transitory and you don't care if you are understood outside of a time
> and a place, perhaps it doesn't matter. For anything important,
> though, particularly in an international forum (like this), I think
> people should attempt to adhere to rules which help the reader
> understand. Using the "accepted" rules is one way of doing that.
>
I'd say most everything you said is valid apart from this bit. Usenet is a
transitory medium where it isn't important to meet traditional standards
imho. Scholars are more likely to study it for evidence of those time
specific nuances than anything else, if it ever comes to be seen of any
importance, which I doubt.
With multiple versions of English and so many non-native English speakers
trying to communicate here, which "accepted" rules are really applicable
anyway?
--
Chad
Chad
How do you call someone who doesn't give a rats about spelling, typos,
broken English, apostrophe placement or good grammAr on usenet? :p
--
Chad
~misfit~
> Have you forgotten that Usenet abbreviations are the basis of
> texttalk? http://css.sbcma.com/timj/acronyms/
"Commonly Used Usenet Acronyms and Terminology"? What a crock of shit. I've
been on usenet for over a decade and, since my injury, spend probably 3+
hours a day on usenet in various groups and I don't recognise a quarter of
the so called "Commonly Used Usenet Acronyms and Terminology" on the first
page.
What does the word 'common' mean? The term "commonly used"?
Methinks it's a wank page. Someone looking for their 15 minutes.
> These 'rules' often only apply to English as written and used in the
> UK.
"Rules"? Are you in the UK Noj?
> Some poor sod struggling to post here from Poland is never going
> to get his head around some of our daft punctuation.
Shit, when I first came to this group *I* was a bit confused. Then again,
rasf1 has it's own flavour, it's different again to most of the rest of
usenet. Most likely because it's *not* filled with people who think the
world begins and ends with 50 states....
--
Cheers,
Shaun.
"Give a man a fire and he's warm for the day. But set fire to him and he's
warm for the rest of his life." Terry Pratchet, 'Jingo'.
~misfit~
Muphry's Law.
--
Ian Rawlings
> The point is, the people who will be writing those newspapers and books
> within a few years are of my son's generation...
Only the ones who can spell, i.e. went to a good school, so on change there!
--
Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!
http://youtube.com/tarcus69
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tarcus/sets/
Phil Carmody
> On 2009-12-01, Shevek <shev...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Whys is that people have so much difficulty spelling "Toro", "Rubens" or
> > "Jenson"? I would assume that most fans would have read the names many
> > times, but many keep making mistakes.
>
> You missed the single most annoying error. Many times here I have
> seen people act like they know what they are talking about but then
> start discussing "MacClaren", whoever they are.
In particular when Alonzo was there.
Phil
--
Any true emperor never needs to wear clothes. -- Devany on r.a.s.f1
Phil Carmody
And 'cared enough'.
I heard 7-year olds on the bus yesterday fluently flipping between
Finnish and Swedish conversation, and quoting English lines from
songs and movies with basically no accent at all yesterday. The
monolingual are dinosaurs. We may think we rule the planet, but
our days are numbered.
Sir Tim
>Mark wrote:
>
>
>> The primary purpose of language is to be understood. If the piece is
>> transitory and you don't care if you are understood outside of a time
>> and a place, perhaps it doesn't matter. For anything important,
>> though, particularly in an international forum (like this), I think
>> people should attempt to adhere to rules which help the reader
>> understand. Using the "accepted" rules is one way of doing that.
>>
>
>I'd say most everything you said is valid apart from this bit. Usenet is a
>transitory medium where it isn't important to meet traditional standards
>imho. Scholars are more likely to study it for evidence of those time
>specific nuances than anything else, if it ever comes to be seen of any
>importance, which I doubt.
I agree with what you say [especially the last bit :)]. I do try, as
a personal discipline, to ensure that my spelling (especially proper
names) and grammar are correct but I'm certainly not a " language
fascist" as far as others are concerned.
>With multiple versions of English and so many non-native English speakers
>trying to communicate here, which "accepted" rules are really applicable
>anyway?
We native English speakers are indeed fortunate that English seems to
be the international language of Usenet. Maybe we should help
non-native English speakers by ensuring that our posts are correct?
On the other hand it is difficult to know who *are* native English
speakers and who are not, especially as there are several Finns, an
Italian and at least one Spaniard who seem to have a better command
of English than many Brits :(
--
Henry Birkin Bt.
Mike
wrote:
> Shevek <sheve...@gmail.com> writes:
> > Chad escribió:> > >>> Bob Dubery escribió:
>
> > >>>>http://www.f1sa.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=19137&I...
> > >>>> 12 teams on it, though a 13th may be added.
> > >>>> Manor have been renamed "Virgin Racing".
> > >>>> Only one seat confirmed at Torro Rosso.
> > >>> For Cliff's sake! It's ToRo Rosso, with just one 'r'! You only had to
> > >>> read the list you posted!
>
> > >>> Whys is that people have so much difficulty spelling "Toro",
> > >>> "Rubens" or "Jenson"? I would assume that most fans would have read
> > >>> the names many times, but many keep making mistakes.
> > >> So what!
> > > Maybe Shevek is just upset that no one care enough to correct his
> > > grammer in the "How do you call a person who speaks 2 languages"
> > > joke yesterday. ;-)
>
> > For Cliff's sake! It's "grammAr", not grammer. It's not so difficult!
>
> And 'cared enough'.
>
> I heard 7-year olds on the bus yesterday fluently flipping between
> Finnish and Swedish conversation, and quoting English lines from
> songs and movies with basically no accent at all yesterday. The
> monolingual are dinosaurs. We may think we rule the planet, but
> our days are numbered.
Mono what? ;)
Alessandro D. Petaccia
<sp...@not.welcome.here.ac.uk> wrote:
>The primary purpose of language is to be understood. If the piece is
>transitory and you don't care if you are understood outside of a time
>and a place, perhaps it doesn't matter. For anything important, though,
>particularly in an international forum (like this), I think people
>should attempt to adhere to rules which help the reader understand.
>Using the "accepted" rules is one way of doing that.
And languages evolve - or devolve, as some would say - and many words
that would have made our teachers cringe in horror are now in
dictionaries and, albeit grudgingly in some cases, generally accepted.
All perfectly true, no doubt, but the OP wasn't talking about language
in general; so if we somewhat must come to terms with the fact that
more and more people use, say, "aloud" for "allowed" or "it's" for
"its" (or the dozens of italian equivalents I'd feel much more
comfortable in exposing) the systematic misspelling of bloody NAMES
is an entirely different matter...
ADP.
Chad
That's a good point.
> On the other hand it is difficult to know who *are* native English
> speakers and who are not, especially as there are several Finns, an
> Italian and at least one Spaniard who seem to have a better command
> of English than many Brits :(
--
Chad
Sir Tim
I completely agree - God knows it's easy enough to look up the correct
spelling of proper names on the web.
Just to be pedantic one should perhaps make it clear that in English
"it's" (with apostrophe) is a contraction of "it is" whereas the
possessive of "it" is "its" (i.e. no apostrophe) - which is what I
think you were pointing out.
--
Henry Birkin Bt.
Phil Carmody
> Somewhere on teh intarwebs Noj wrote:
> > Have you forgotten that Usenet abbreviations are the basis of
> > texttalk? http://css.sbcma.com/timj/acronyms/
>
> "Commonly Used Usenet Acronyms and Terminology"? What a crock of shit. I've
> been on usenet for over a decade and, since my injury, spend probably 3+
> hours a day on usenet in various groups and I don't recognise a quarter of
> the so called "Commonly Used Usenet Acronyms and Terminology" on the first
> page.
So you din't wade through it all the way to:
PLONK Usually in brackets - <PLONK>. The sound of someone being dumped
into a user's blocked senders list.
'Blocked senders list'? The guy has no fucking idea about usenet
terminology at all.
> What does the word 'common' mean? The term "commonly used"?
>
> Methinks it's a wank page. Someone looking for their 15 minutes.
Like all things wank, best kept private and not put in the open.
Unless it's two hot*#[!"*NO CARRIER
Paul-B
http://forums.theregister.co.uk/forum/2/2008/11/11/apostrophe_abuse/#c_3
61932
HTH ;-)
--
Paul-B
Alessandro D. Petaccia
wrote:
>On Wed, 02 Dec 2009 12:54:10 +0100, Alessandro D. Petaccia
><ale...@despammed.com> wrote:
>>more and more people use, say, "aloud" for "allowed" or "it's" for
>>"its"...
>
>Just to be pedantic one should perhaps make it clear that in English
>"it's" (with apostrophe) is a contraction of "it is" whereas the
>possessive of "it" is "its" (i.e. no apostrophe) - which is what I
>think you were pointing out.
Indeed it was. The same goes for "you're" and "your", I notice - they
seem to have become interchangeable for some obscure reason. And as
you can probably imagine, as a non-native speaker I find that rather
disconcerting: I mean, "aloud" and "allowed", OK, that's phonetics,
but why would I ever want to add an apostrophe where-
*reads Paul's link* ...Ah, it's because of "the hopeless state of
English punctuation and spelling", apparently. People panic and
overcorrect? Wow. Good thing I'm a bloody foreigner then!
ADP.
Bob Dubery
Although I'm an occasional (I hope) offender in this regard, by and
large I agree with you. However there's always a possibility that
individuals or the forum as a whole start valuing spelling and grammar
over accuracy and good thinking. Poorly spelled truths are preferable
to immaculate lies.
build
wrote:
> Good thing I'm a bloody foreigner then!
>
> ADP.
I communicate with many foreigners, their written English is often
impeccable compared to their spoken ingrish but because they speak as
they write the translation is very easy. It's when foreigners speak
ingrish as they speak their own language that my brain gets over
heated and ends in a segmentation fault (core dumped) and I need to
apologise.
beers,
build
Paul-B
LOL!
From the country that gave us Strine... :-)
--
Paul-B
build
Beg yours?
Mike
wrote:
> "~misfit~" <sore_n_ha...@yahoo-nospam.com.au> writes:
> > Somewhere on teh intarwebs Noj wrote:
> > > Have you forgotten that Usenet abbreviations are the basis of
>
> > "Commonly Used Usenet Acronyms and Terminology"? What a crock of shit. I've
> > been on usenet for over a decade and, since my injury, spend probably 3+
> > hours a day on usenet in various groups and I don't recognise a quarter of
> > the so called "Commonly Used Usenet Acronyms and Terminology" on the first
> > page.
>
> So you din't wade through it all the way to:
>
> PLONK Usually in brackets - <PLONK>. The sound of someone being dumped
> into a user's blocked senders list.
>
> 'Blocked senders list'? The guy has no fucking idea about usenet
> terminology at all.
>
> > What does the word 'common' mean? The term "commonly used"?
>
> > Methinks it's a wank page. Someone looking for their 15 minutes.
>
> Like all things wank, best kept private and not put in the open.
> Unless it's two hot*#[!"*NO CARRIER
Ha. I LOLd at that last bit. :)
Paul-B
build
Thanks yobbo.
;-)
Sir Tim
<mega...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Poorly spelled truths are preferable
>to immaculate lies.
Agreed!
--
Henry Birkin Bt.
APLer
news:xn0gidma2...@news.individual.net:
> APLer wrote:
>
>> Bob Dubery <mega...@gmail.com> wrote in
>> news:306a1005-e99c-4418...@r24g2000yqd.googlegroups.com
>> :
>>
>> >
> http://www.f1sa.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=19137&Itemi
>> > d=219
>> >
>> > 12 teams on it, though a 13th may be added.
>> >
>> > Manor have been renamed "Virgin Racing".
>> >
>> > Only one seat confirmed at Torro Rosso.
>> >
>> > Ferrari still linked to a ciggy company's name.
>> >
>> > Toyota are deemed to be required to put an entry forward but have
>> > not done so to date.
>> >
>> Heidfeld better scramble if he want's a half decent seat next year.
>> Apparently my earlier statement about Rubens resigning himself to
>> Coultard's old role - but with Williams is the case. Hulkenburg
>> certainly has potential. 10 podiums with 5 wins last year in GP2.
>> Wonder who Renault are going to get? That's the last decent seat
>> other than Brawn.
>
> The two seats not currently on the list will be decent seats.
>
You mean the Brawn and Renault ones I *specifically* referred to or are
you being purposely vague again so you can't be wrong?
APLer
news:hf3ep0$fcj$1...@north.jnrs.ja.net:
> ric zito <add...@in.sig> wrote:
>> AC <x...@xxx.xxx> wrote:
> and you have a recipe for confusion. We struggle to read 300 year old
> manuscripts and need expert help when you get to 500 years and beyond.
> I suspect that there are things being written today which won't be
> properly understood within my lifetime because they are so dependent on
> short-lived, localised cultural context.
>
Ah, but you can have so much fun with it and prove a point to boot. I
opened up my copy of Hamlet and showed the page to my Niece the other day
(just going into HS). The look of utter confusion on her face was
priceless. When I was in high school, we covered three Shakespear books
every year. Now apparently they do three all through HS. I had trouble with
Bill the first time I saw his writing too, but by the end of grade 9 english
I could read him like any other english. The only detectable difference was
the more extensive use of colourful analogies and the like.
Mark
> Mark <sp...@not.welcome.here.ac.uk> wrote in
> news:hf3ep0$fcj$1...@north.jnrs.ja.net:
>
>> manuscripts and need expert help when you get to 500 years and beyond.
>> I suspect that there are things being written today which won't be
>> properly understood within my lifetime because they are so dependent on
>> short-lived, localised cultural context.
>
> Ah, but you can have so much fun with it and prove a point to boot. I
> opened up my copy of Hamlet and showed the page to my Niece the other day
> (just going into HS). The look of utter confusion on her face was
> priceless. When I was in high school, we covered three Shakespear books
> every year. Now apparently they do three all through HS. I had trouble with
> Bill the first time I saw his writing too, but by the end of grade 9 english
> I could read him like any other english. The only detectable difference was
> the more extensive use of colourful analogies and the like.
Yes, but Shakespeare wrote to a "standard" (if not formalised as today).
A lot of modern vernacular is very transient indeed.
Shakespeare is also a special case because he so widely respected in the
english-speaking world; so much of his language has influenced english
(written and spoken) right through to today, it might be archaic but
it's not entirely unfamiliar.
I agree with what you posted, though.
David Melville
<sore_n...@yahoo-nospam.com.au> wrote:
>> I think there is some interwebs law that says anyone who turns pedant
>> on spelling/grammar is 90% likely to make an error in that post
>> themselves. :p
>
> Muphry's Law.
Now that's funny.
--
Cheers,
Dave
Don't touch me unless you love me.
David Melville
And Germaine Greer and Kylie Minogue and you can keep them.
Suck on that.
~misfit~
> On Wed, 02 Dec 2009 16:43:37 +1100, ~misfit~
> <sore_n...@yahoo-nospam.com.au> wrote:
>
>>> I think there is some interwebs law that says anyone who turns
>>> pedant on spelling/grammar is 90% likely to make an error in that
>>> post themselves. :p
>>
>> Muphry's Law.
>
> Now that's funny.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muphry%27s_law>
--
Shaun.
"Give a man a fire and he's warm for the day. But set fire to him and he's
warm for the rest of his life." Terry Pratchet, 'Jingo'.
~misfit~
>
>>
>> Somewhere on teh intarwebs Noj wrote:
>>> Have you forgotten that Usenet abbreviations are the basis of
>>
>> "Commonly Used Usenet Acronyms and Terminology"? What a crock of
>> shit. I've been on usenet for over a decade and, since my injury,
>> spend probably 3+ hours a day on usenet in various groups and I
>> don't recognise a quarter of the so called "Commonly Used Usenet
>> Acronyms and Terminology" on the first page.
>>
>>
>> Methinks it's a wank page. Someone looking for their 15 minutes.
>
No. Just because you're upset there's no need to start with the ad hominem.
> It was an example. There are many such sites.
And a bad one at that. It (seems to be) specific to the newsgroup
alt.binaries.pictures.fishing newsgroup which would explain why a lot of the
"Commonly Used Usenet Acronyms and Terminology" looked distinctly uncommon.
Such as BWO for 'Blue winged olive'
>>> These 'rules' often only apply to English as written and used in the
>>> UK.
>>
>> "Rules"? Are you in the UK Noj?
>
> Wot u gonna pick me up on now?
Are you a stunning (female) red-head with a wicked sense of humour, kind,
intelligent and compassionate who stands to inherit a lot of money?
Otherwise I don't think it's worth me leaving New Zealand to meet you.
Actually, from the way you write "Wot u...." I can already tell you, no, I'm
not going to "pick you up".
>>> Some poor sod struggling to post here from Poland is never going
>>> to get his head around some of our daft punctuation.
>>
>> Shit, when I first came to this group *I* was a bit confused. Then
>> again, rasf1 has it's own flavour, it's different again to most of
>> the rest of usenet. Most likely because it's *not* filled with
>> people who think the world begins and ends with 50 states....
>
> 30,00 text news groups and most are fucked by merkin twats who can't
> understand why the rest of the world misunderstands them!
David Melville
<sore_n...@yahoo-nospam.com.au> wrote:
> Somewhere on teh intarwebs David Melville wrote:
>> On Wed, 02 Dec 2009 16:43:37 +1100, ~misfit~
>> <sore_n...@yahoo-nospam.com.au> wrote:
>>
>>>> I think there is some interwebs law that says anyone who turns
>>>> pedant on spelling/grammar is 90% likely to make an error in that
>>>> post themselves. :p
>>>
>>> Muphry's Law.
>>
>> Now that's funny.
>
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muphry%27s_law>
Oh! I didn't know that, but I did surmise that you had misspelled "Murphy"
on porpoise.
~misfit~
> "~misfit~" <sore_n...@yahoo-nospam.com.au> writes:
>> Somewhere on teh intarwebs Noj wrote:
>>> Have you forgotten that Usenet abbreviations are the basis of
>>> texttalk? http://css.sbcma.com/timj/acronyms/
>>
>> "Commonly Used Usenet Acronyms and Terminology"? What a crock of
>> shit. I've been on usenet for over a decade and, since my injury,
>> spend probably 3+ hours a day on usenet in various groups and I
>> don't recognise a quarter of the so called "Commonly Used Usenet
>> Acronyms and Terminology" on the first page.
>
> So you din't wade through it all the way to:
>
> PLONK Usually in brackets - <PLONK>. The sound of someone being
> dumped into a user's blocked senders list.
LOL, yeah, I did later. However so much of the first page was specific to
the newsgroup for which it was written I hadn't heard of it. The later pages
were a bit more generic.
> 'Blocked senders list'? The guy has no fucking idea about usenet
> terminology at all.
<g>
>> What does the word 'common' mean? The term "commonly used"?
>>
>> Methinks it's a wank page. Someone looking for their 15 minutes.
>
> Like all things wank, best kept private and not put in the open.
> Unless it's two hot*#[!"*NO CARRIER
LOL.
After posting I checked it out a bit more fully and realised that it's a
newsgroup-specific page with a rather pretentious and more wide-ranging
title.
Bigbird
> You mean the Brawn and Renault ones I specifically referred to or are
> you being purposely vague again so you can't be wrong?
It's only vague if you are being a bit thick.
Contrary to what you imply Brawn, Renault (and 10 other teams) are on
the list. FYI they have 4 seats between them.
The 13th possible team is not. Do you require further clarification?
I'm not sure I can ever be wrong when opposing anything you utter, not
without a hole in the space time continuum.
--
Bigbird
#
As for my humour:
I am like an artist who's work isn't fully appreciated until he's
shuffled off this mortal coil.
You'll be laughing when I'm dead!
~misfit~
> On Sun, 06 Dec 2009 14:19:47 +1100, ~misfit~
> <sore_n...@yahoo-nospam.com.au> wrote:
>
>> Somewhere on teh intarwebs David Melville wrote:
>>> On Wed, 02 Dec 2009 16:43:37 +1100, ~misfit~
>>> <sore_n...@yahoo-nospam.com.au> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> I think there is some interwebs law that says anyone who turns
>>>>> pedant on spelling/grammar is 90% likely to make an error in that
>>>>> post themselves. :p
>>>>
>>>> Muphry's Law.
>>>
>>> Now that's funny.
>>
>> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muphry%27s_law>
>
> Oh! I didn't know that, but I did surmise that you had misspelled
> "Murphy" on porpoise.
Hehee! I thought that might be the case and for a while was tempted to take
the credit for it. ;-)
--
Cheers,
build
Glock
di Grassi
beers,