On Nov 7, 12:09 am, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > I got the word audible from an online critic.
> Perhaps the word was "listenable."
I meant it in the sense of listenable, yes, but it was
audible. I googled for the quote, but only found my own
message, about a dozen times. Apparently I misread
something. Sorry for that.
> "Athel Cornish-Bowden" <athel...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:afstalF29mjU1@mid.individual.net...
> > On 2012-11-06 15:30:47 +0100, The General of the Faceless Anti-Franz Shadow Army
> > <craoibhi...@gmail.com> said:
> >> On Nov 6, 9:26 am, Franz Gnaedinger <f...@bluemail.ch> wrote:
> >>> . I shall begin a new series
> >>> of messages, further exploring the formula of the
> >>> equal unequal, probably in my Magdalenian thread.
> >> Don't bother. Our barren minds won't get it anyway. Find a better
> >> venue where you will be duly appreciated.
> > He's not writing for us.
> If he were genuinely writing for the youngsters who are to discover
> him in the future he wouldn't keep bickering and arguing with
> the current contributors, he would ignore everybody's criticism
> and go on developing his theme without carping on about stalking
> and so on and so on.
> BTW, if I remember right, the "future" when he was supposed to
> be "discovered" was 2011, or was it 2012? Perhaps this is due to
> some kind of temporal oscillation we are going through right now.
Wasn't it 2005 until his astrologer changed her mind? Do Swiss
astrologers follow the supposed Mayan prediction? (Which isn'/t a
prediction, simply the moment when the cycle starts over at 0.)
On Nov 7, 2:54 am, Franz Gnaedinger <f...@bluemail.ch> wrote:
> On Nov 7, 12:09 am, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > > I got the word audible from an online critic.
> > Perhaps the word was "listenable."
> I meant it in the sense of listenable, yes, but it was
> audible. I googled for the quote, but only found my own
> message, about a dozen times. Apparently I misread
> something. Sorry for that.
Do you suppose that finding your own message about a dozen times was a
hint about something?
>On Nov 6, 10:56 pm, "pauljk" <paul.kr...@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>> "Athel Cornish-Bowden" <athel...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:afstalF29mjU1@mid.individual.net...
>> > On 2012-11-06 15:30:47 +0100, The General of the Faceless Anti-Franz Shadow Army
>> > <craoibhi...@gmail.com> said:
>> >> On Nov 6, 9:26 am, Franz Gnaedinger <f...@bluemail.ch> wrote:
>> >>> . I shall begin a new series
>> >>> of messages, further exploring the formula of the
>> >>> equal unequal, probably in my Magdalenian thread.
>> >> Don't bother. Our barren minds won't get it anyway. Find a better
>> >> venue where you will be duly appreciated.
>> > He's not writing for us.
>> If he were genuinely writing for the youngsters who are to discover
>> him in the future he wouldn't keep bickering and arguing with
>> the current contributors, he would ignore everybody's criticism
>> and go on developing his theme without carping on about stalking
>> and so on and so on.
>> BTW, if I remember right, the "future" when he was supposed to
>> be "discovered" was 2011, or was it 2012? Perhaps this is due to
>> some kind of temporal oscillation we are going through right now.
>Wasn't it 2005 until his astrologer changed her mind? Do Swiss
>astrologers follow the supposed Mayan prediction? (Which isn'/t a
>prediction, simply the moment when the cycle starts over at 0.)
The few Mayan immigrants I know have already bought 2013 calendars.
--
"One thing happened after another, and before
we knew it, we were dead"
-- Michael O'Donoghue
> On Nov 7, 12:09 am, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> > I got the word audible from an online critic.
>> Perhaps the word was "listenable."
> I meant it in the sense of listenable, yes, but it was
> audible. I googled for the quote, but only found my own
> message, about a dozen times. Apparently I misread
> something. Sorry for that.
> On Wed, 7 Nov 2012 04:32:38 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"
> <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote, perhaps among other things:
> >On Nov 6, 10:56 pm, "pauljk" <paul.kr...@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
> >> "Athel Cornish-Bowden" <athel...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> >>news:afstalF29mjU1@mid.individual.net...
> >> > On 2012-11-06 15:30:47 +0100, The General of the Faceless Anti-Franz Shadow Army
> >> > <craoibhi...@gmail.com> said:
> >> >> On Nov 6, 9:26 am, Franz Gnaedinger <f...@bluemail.ch> wrote:
> >> >>> . I shall begin a new series
> >> >>> of messages, further exploring the formula of the
> >> >>> equal unequal, probably in my Magdalenian thread.
> >> >> Don't bother. Our barren minds won't get it anyway. Find a better
> >> >> venue where you will be duly appreciated.
> >> > He's not writing for us.
> >> If he were genuinely writing for the youngsters who are to discover
> >> him in the future he wouldn't keep bickering and arguing with
> >> the current contributors, he would ignore everybody's criticism
> >> and go on developing his theme without carping on about stalking
> >> and so on and so on.
> >> BTW, if I remember right, the "future" when he was supposed to
> >> be "discovered" was 2011, or was it 2012? Perhaps this is due to
> >> some kind of temporal oscillation we are going through right now.
> >Wasn't it 2005 until his astrologer changed her mind? Do Swiss
> >astrologers follow the supposed Mayan prediction? (Which isn'/t a
> >prediction, simply the moment when the cycle starts over at 0.)
> The few Mayan immigrants I know have already bought 2013 calendars.
It's amazing how much modern-day Mayans (Guatemalans, usually) look
like the ancient glyphs -- the flat foreheads and angly noses are
striking.
> On Nov 6, 10:56 pm, "pauljk" <paul.kr...@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>> "Athel Cornish-Bowden" <athel...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:afstalF29mjU1@mid.individual.net...
>> > On 2012-11-06 15:30:47 +0100, The General of the Faceless Anti-Franz Shadow Army
>> > <craoibhi...@gmail.com> said:
>> >> On Nov 6, 9:26 am, Franz Gnaedinger <f...@bluemail.ch> wrote:
>> >>> . I shall begin a new series
>> >>> of messages, further exploring the formula of the
>> >>> equal unequal, probably in my Magdalenian thread.
>> >> Don't bother. Our barren minds won't get it anyway. Find a better
>> >> venue where you will be duly appreciated.
>> > He's not writing for us.
>> If he were genuinely writing for the youngsters who are to discover
>> him in the future he wouldn't keep bickering and arguing with
>> the current contributors, he would ignore everybody's criticism
>> and go on developing his theme without carping on about stalking
>> and so on and so on.
>> BTW, if I remember right, the "future" when he was supposed to
>> be "discovered" was 2011, or was it 2012? Perhaps this is due to
>> some kind of temporal oscillation we are going through right now.
> Wasn't it 2005 until his astrologer changed her mind?
Hmm, that rings a bell, how time flies.
The last time (2-5 months ago) when I noticed him mentioning
the astrologer again, the year morphed into 2013.
> Do Swiss
> astrologers follow the supposed Mayan prediction? (Which isn'/t a
> prediction, simply the moment when the cycle starts over at 0.)
Yes, it's a similar kind of prediction as one of mine which says
"BEWARE, in 88 years the year will end in double zero".
> > On 2012-11-06 15:30:47 +0100, The General of the Faceless Anti-Franz Shadow Army
> > <craoibhi...@gmail.com> said:
> >> On Nov 6, 9:26 am, Franz Gnaedinger <f...@bluemail.ch> wrote:
> >>> . I shall begin a new series
> >>> of messages, further exploring the formula of the
> >>> equal unequal, probably in my Magdalenian thread.
> >> Don't bother. Our barren minds won't get it anyway. Find a better
> >> venue where you will be duly appreciated.
> > He's not writing for us.
> If he were genuinely writing for the youngsters who are to discover
> him in the future he wouldn't keep bickering and arguing with
> the current contributors, he would ignore everybody's criticism
> and go on developing his theme without carping on about stalking
> and so on and so on.
> BTW, if I remember right, the "future" when he was supposed to
> be "discovered" was 2011, or was it 2012? Perhaps this is due to
> some kind of temporal oscillation we are going through right now.
> pjk
> > He's writing for the keen young linguists of the future who will chance upon his
> > publication thread and realize that an unrecognized genius has been walking this
> > earth.
> > However, on another matter, LanguageHat today reports the following Irish verb:
> > "sclogtha, a., unable to gasp. Táim sclogtha leis an dtart, I am unable to gasp from
> > thirst." Is this something you've ever needed to say in your exploration of Irish?
> > (Mind you, some of the spelling doesn't look very Irish to my eyes, most notably
> > "dtart", but I copied and pasted, without retyping)
> > I could of course start a new thread for this, but it seems better to clutter up
> > Franz's rambling reflections with stuff he will think irrelevant.
On Nov 7, 4:56 am, "pauljk" <paul.kr...@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
> If he were genuinely writing for the youngsters who are to discover
> him in the future he wouldn't keep bickering and arguing with
> the current contributors, he would ignore everybody's criticism
> and go on developing his theme without carping on about stalking
> and so on and so on.
> BTW, if I remember right, the "future" when he was supposed to
> be "discovered" was 2011, or was it 2012? Perhaps this is due to
> some kind of temporal oscillation we are going through right now.
Sorry for having sent off an empty message, my fingers
were too quick. Ideas can be developed in discussions,
and testing a new idea or hypothesis or theory in a sci.group
is about the hardest test. How many times did I tell the story
of my astrologer? Seems you want to read it again and again.
Well then, here goes.
In the late 1990s I went to my astrologer and asked her
whether anybody will ever be interested in my work?
She lit a candle, drew the curtains, had a long look
into her Fine Magic Crystal Ball (tradem.reg.), sighed,
and said I am a hopeless case. Nobody will be interested
in my work. Not until, perhaps, 2011 or '12 when a young
couple will stumble over it. I should write for them, not
bothering about what other people think or say ... I follow
her advice. Meanwhile the year 2012 is almost over.
Can it be that she was wrong? Note well, she said
'perhaps' in 2011 or '12. And then, astrologers are always
right, also and especially when they are wrong. The aim
of my astrologer was to encourage me, and that she
achieved. I gained confidence and my work gathered
momentum, carrying me on on its own.
On Nov 8, 3:09 pm, "Arnaud F." <fournet.arn...@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
> Le jeudi 8 novembre 2012 11:44:49 UTC+1, The General of the Faceless Anti-Franz Shadow Army a écrit :
> > You haven't told me your address. I'd like to send you a copy of my
> > new book.
> Who are you talking to?
> A.
Basically, Franz. He sees me as a barren, improductive mind, but in
all these years he has been preaching his gospel, I have produced two
books in Irish. I think it would be good for his sense of reality to
see one of my books.
>On Nov 7, 8:02 pm, Paul Madarasz <paul.madar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 7 Nov 2012 04:32:38 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"
>> <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote, perhaps among other things:
>> >On Nov 6, 10:56 pm, "pauljk" <paul.kr...@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>> >> "Athel Cornish-Bowden" <athel...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>> >>news:afstalF29mjU1@mid.individual.net...
>> >> > On 2012-11-06 15:30:47 +0100, The General of the Faceless Anti-Franz Shadow Army
>> >> > <craoibhi...@gmail.com> said:
>> >> >> On Nov 6, 9:26 am, Franz Gnaedinger <f...@bluemail.ch> wrote:
>> >> >>> . I shall begin a new series
>> >> >>> of messages, further exploring the formula of the
>> >> >>> equal unequal, probably in my Magdalenian thread.
>> >> >> Don't bother. Our barren minds won't get it anyway. Find a better
>> >> >> venue where you will be duly appreciated.
>> >> > He's not writing for us.
>> >> If he were genuinely writing for the youngsters who are to discover
>> >> him in the future he wouldn't keep bickering and arguing with
>> >> the current contributors, he would ignore everybody's criticism
>> >> and go on developing his theme without carping on about stalking
>> >> and so on and so on.
>> >> BTW, if I remember right, the "future" when he was supposed to
>> >> be "discovered" was 2011, or was it 2012? Perhaps this is due to
>> >> some kind of temporal oscillation we are going through right now.
>> >Wasn't it 2005 until his astrologer changed her mind? Do Swiss
>> >astrologers follow the supposed Mayan prediction? (Which isn'/t a
>> >prediction, simply the moment when the cycle starts over at 0.)
>> The few Mayan immigrants I know have already bought 2013 calendars.
>It's amazing how much modern-day Mayans (Guatemalans, usually) look
>like the ancient glyphs -- the flat foreheads and angly noses are
>striking.
This is true. I guess the ancients were into representational art.
--
"One thing happened after another, and before
we knew it, we were dead"
-- Michael O'Donoghue
<craoibhi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 6, 6:48 pm, Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> > On 2012-11-06 15:30:47 +0100, The General of the Faceless Anti-Franz
> > Shadow Army <craoibhi...@gmail.com> said:
> > > On Nov 6, 9:26 am, Franz Gnaedinger <f...@bluemail.ch> wrote:
> > >> . I shall begin a new series
> > >> of messages, further exploring the formula of the
> > >> equal unequal, probably in my Magdalenian thread.
> > > Don't bother. Our barren minds won't get it anyway. Find a better
> > > venue where you will be duly appreciated.
> > He's not writing for us. He's writing for the keen young linguists of
> > the future who will chance upon his publication thread and realize that
> > an unrecognized genius has been walking this earth.
> > However, on another matter, LanguageHat today reports the following
> > Irish verb: "sclogtha, a., unable to gasp. Táim sclogtha leis an dtart,
> > I am unable to gasp from thirst." Is this something you've ever needed
> > to say in your exploration of Irish? (Mind you, some of the spelling
> > doesn't look very Irish to my eyes, most notably "dtart", but I copied
> > and pasted, without retyping)
> > I could of course start a new thread for this, but it seems better to
> > clutter up Franz's rambling reflections with stuff he will think
> > irrelevant.
> Well, I would prefer "stiúgtha" from the verb "stiúg!/stiúgadh" = to
> expire, to perish. The lenition in "dtart" (t -> d, written dt) is
> dialectal, because t is lenited only in Munster Irish.
Sorry, I meant to say "eclipsed", not "lenited", and of course, that
it is eclipsed only in Munster Irish in this particular position, i.e.
after simple preposition + definite article. In other positions, such
as after plural definite article, t is regularly eclipsed: tír na
dtréanfhear "the country of the strong men", tiarna na dtailte "the
lord of the lands", fear na dteangacha "the man of the [many]
languages".
