Haplology
lrud...@vax.clarku.edu
parenthesized comment, when the user doesn't type the closing parenthesis,
forcing the mouth of the smiley to do double duty. I see this a lot these days.
("Haplology" is the word for the linguistic phenomenon which, applied to
"haplology", yields "haplogy".)
Lee Rudolph
Lars R{der Clausen
^^
Who poked out you other eye?
>Lee Rudolph
-Lars Clausen
--
Cleveland still lives. God ____must be dead.
Thomas Koenig
>Even more offensive than smiley use is smiley use at the end of a
>parenthesized comment, when the user doesn't type the closing parenthesis,
>forcing the mouth of the smiley to do double duty. I see this a lot these days.
The reason I'm doing this is because the vi I'm using to write news
articles does do automatic parantheses matching (flashing the cursor
back, just like Emacs does), but it is too stupid that a closing
parenthesis is part of a smiley. Anybody got an Emacs minor mode
for that?
(-: Now, of course, I could enclose humorous sentences in open and
close smileys, like this one (remeniscent of the two different
exclamation marks in Spanish), but somehow, I don't think it's really
worth the effort :-).
BTW, what's the official punctuation for smiley - end of sentence, is
it ":-)." or ".:-)" ?
--
Thomas Koenig, ig...@rz.uni-karlsruhe.de, ig...@dkauni2.bitnet
The joy of engineering is to find a straight line on a double
logarithmic diagram.
luis fernandes
>BTW, what's the official punctuation for smiley - end of sentence, is
>it ":-)." or ".:-)" ?
Neither, I should think, lest it looks like a smiley with (either) a
(neck or brain) tumor.
Another example is a sad-parenthetical-smiley entry:
I was doing foo (but bar was adamantly against it :-(
closing ')' is replaced with '(' to emphasize sadness.
I was doing foo (but bar was adamantly against it :-()
closing ')' is included; correct syntax, but it doesn't look like a
sad-smiley anymore.
I tend to use the former construct, and hope people don't think I missed
the closing-paren...
Douglas W. Jones,201H MLH,3193350740,3193382879
by e...@ee.ryerson.ca (luis fernandes):
> Another example is a sad-parenthetical-smiley entry:
> I was doing foo (but bar was adamantly against it :-(
> I was doing foo (but bar was adamantly against it :-()
No, neither of these is correct. The correct forms are as follows:
I was doing foo (but bar was adamantly against it )-:
This allows the sad smiley to serve as a sad trailing parenthesis.
It should be noted that the above forms (both correct and incorrect)
are only semiparentheticals. If you like the Spanish punctuation
style of using an inverted question mark to indicate the start of a
question, you can use a fully-parenthetical-smiley construct:
I was doing foo :-( but bar was adamantly against it )-:
There are extremely important but subtle distinctions to be made between
the following two sad-semiparenthetical forms:
I was doing foo (but bar was adamantly against it )-:
I was doing foo :-( but bar was adamantly against it)
In the former, your reader only encounters the smiley after reading the
parenthetic remark, so you've withheld your editorial comment until after
the reader has had a chance to understand what is being said. In the
latter, you are announcing your feelings before the reader sees what you
are talking about, perhaps in an attempt to prejudice the reader.
Of course, the above distinction also applies to the use of
happy-semiparenthetical smileys, as:
I was doing foo (-: but bar was adamantly against it)
I was doing foo (but bar was adamantly against it :-)
Finally, the following fully-parenthetical forms are frequently
indications of a somewhat confused writer:
I was doing foo (-: but bar was adamantly against it )-:
I was doing foo :-( but bar was adamantly against it :-)
Both are valid forms, but they are of limited utility.
Doug Jones
jo...@cs.uiowa.edu
Danny R. Faught
>
>(-: Now, of course, I could enclose humorous sentences in open and
>close smileys, like this one (remeniscent of the two different
>exclamation marks in Spanish), but somehow, I don't think it's really
>worth the effort :-).
Hey, I like it!
>BTW, what's the official punctuation for smiley - end of sentence, is
>it ":-)." or ".:-)" ?
Hmm, I've been wondering about that myself. I've tried leaving off the
period, you know, period means no emotion, exclamation point means strong
emotion, smiley means ha-ha:-) Nope, needs more space :-) Hmm, maybe.
Be careful with this one.:-) Both the "one space after a period" cult
and the "two spaces after a period" cult will get you for that one.
How about this. :-) I guess that should be: How about this? :-)
What does Miss Manners say about smiley etiquette?
I have a great idea - instead of grepping for 'Kibo', I'll grep for ':-)'.
That way, I'll only get the funny stuff! Just call me Smibo.
--
Danny Faught, Convex rookie
"Everything is deeply intertwingled." (Ted Nelson)
iv...@cc.usu.edu
> Another example is a sad-parenthetical-smiley entry:
>
> I was doing foo (but bar was adamantly against it :-(
>
> closing ')' is replaced with '(' to emphasize sadness.
>
> I was doing foo (but bar was adamantly against it :-()
>
> closing ')' is included; correct syntax, but it doesn't look like a
> sad-smiley anymore.
How about:
I was doing foo :-(but bar was adamantly against it).
Roger Ivie
iv...@cc.usu.edu
The One True Dave
How about something to separate the smiley from the paren?
(This is an ex-parrot. :-) /**/)
(Bill Gates is discussed too much in this newsgroup. :-) /* ( for my vi */ )
(I just crashed another pack. :-( )-: My boss is sad, too.)
Get creative!
Stewart J. Stremler
: How about something to separate the smiley from the paren?
: (This is an ex-parrot. :-) /**/)
: (Bill Gates is discussed too much in this newsgroup. :-) /* ( for my vi */ )
: (I just crashed another pack. :-( )-: My boss is sad, too.)
: Get creative!
Why not just make a habit of using a variety of bracketing puncuation?
[ Like square brackets, for example :-) ] (Or use parens, and be happy :-)
--but be sure to continue one's sentence before ending!)
So we'd have:
{ This is an ex-parrot. :-) }
[ Bill Gates is discussed too much in this newsgroup :-) (for my vi) ]
..and so on and so forth.... :-)
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stewart Stremler masc...@ucssun1.sdsu.edu
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"What can the harvest hope for, if not for the care of the Reaper Man?"
-Terry Pratchett
luis fernandes
>From article <1993Apr6.1...@ee.ryerson.ca>,
>by e...@ee.ryerson.ca (luis fernandes):
>
>> Another example is a sad-parenthetical-smiley entry:
>
>> I was doing foo (but bar was adamantly against it :-(
>
>> I was doing foo (but bar was adamantly against it :-()
>
>No, neither of these is correct. The correct forms are as follows:
>
> I was doing foo (but bar was adamantly against it )-:
>
>This allows the sad smiley to serve as a sad trailing parenthesis.
This form had not occured to me. I would tend to agree with this
form initially, however protocol dictates that in order to view a
smiley, the viewer tilts one's head left, i.e. the first character
from left-to-right represents the top-part (the head) of the
smiley.
Viewing )-: using the recognized method produces an upside-down-sad-smiley.
Also, isn't (-: considered a left-handed smiley, i.e. implying that the
writer is left-handed (?)
[...]
>There are extremely important but subtle distinctions to be made between
>the following two sad-semiparenthetical forms:
>
> I was doing foo (but bar was adamantly against it )-:
> I was doing foo :-( but bar was adamantly against it)
>
>In the former, your reader only encounters the smiley after reading the
>parenthetic remark, so you've withheld your editorial comment until after
>the reader has had a chance to understand what is being said. In the
>latter, you are announcing your feelings before the reader sees what you
>are talking about, perhaps in an attempt to prejudice the reader.
>
Given a choice, I would prefer to let the reader encounter *my*
editorial opinion of whatever is being said, *after* the text has
been read.
Smiley-syntax-wise (semi-parenthitical):
I was doing foo (but bar was adamantly against it )-:
is incorrect (it's upsidedown), but
I was doing foo :-( but bar was adamantly against it)
is correct, however, as you say it may prejudice the reader, also, is
it not customary to place smiley's at the end ?
[...]
Could we get an official ruling on this please ? Mr. Sanderson,
if you would indulge us...
Douglas W. Jones,201H MLH,3193350740,3193382879
> if you would indulge us...
I'm glad you're taking this seriously. It is extremely important that
all discussion of smileys be done in deadly serious style. However,
I feel that it is in poor taste to make any statement about correct
smiley usage that is formulated as anything less than an absolute
pronouncement of how it must be done.
> ... however protocol dictates that in order to view a
> smiley, the viewer tilts one's head left, i.e. the first character
> from left-to-right represents the top-part (the head) of the smiley.
This absolute statement is in the best of taste, being formulated as
an absolute, unquestionable dictum!
> Also, isn't (-: considered a left-handed smiley ...
Indeed it is! I should note that I am very much left handed, so when I
recommended the following form:
I was doing foo (but bar was adamantly against it )-:
I was absolutely correct to make such a recommendation!
Doug Jones
jo...@cs.uiowa.edu
luis fernandes
>by e...@ee.ryerson.ca (luis fernandes):
>>
>> Could we get an official ruling on this please ? Mr. Sanderson,
>> if you would indulge us...
>
>I'm glad you're taking this seriously. It is extremely important that
>all discussion of smileys be done in deadly serious style.
Well, ummm, what I had in mind what I typed that was something
along the lines of Daffy-Duck saying, "Bartender! Bartender!
Where's my drink!". As far as I know, there is no Daffy-Duck smiley.
> However, I feel that it is in poor taste to make any statement
> about correct smiley usage that is formulated as anything less than
> an absolute pronouncement of how it must be done.
Agreed!
>> ... however protocol dictates that in order to view a
>> smiley, the viewer tilts one's head left, i.e. the first character
>> from left-to-right represents the top-part (the head) of the smiley.
>
>This absolute statement is in the best of taste, being formulated as
>an absolute, unquestionable dictum!
>
>> Also, isn't (-: considered a left-handed smiley ...
>
>Indeed it is! I should note that I am very much left handed, so when I
>recommended the following form:
>
> I was doing foo (but bar was adamantly against it )-:
>
>I was absolutely correct to make such a recommendation!
>
I don't dispute this.
It's just that )-: is an overloaded (C++ sense) smiley, i.e.:
- syntactically correct parentheses
- indicates sadness
- denotes left-handedness
- syntactically correct semi-parenthetical smiley
Would it be improper, smiley-protocol-wise, for me, or anyone else who
is right-handed, to use )-: in the occasion that it met the other 3
conditions ?
If I do use it, how would I reconcile the question: "Why did you use
)-: if you're *not* left handed ? Hmmm?"
DaviD W. Sanderson
# Could we get an official ruling on this please ? Mr. Sanderson, if
# you would indulge us...
Sure. Here's a quote from my book, "Smileys", ISBN 1-56592-041-4,
published by O'Reilly & Associates.
Q. Since smileys contain punctuation marks, how do I mix them
with the punctuation I use in my sentences?
A. In general, use them after the end of the regular sentence
punctuation, instead of before it. This way, they act like
pictographic sentences, and people won't confuse the regular
punctuation with the characters in the smiley.
Q. What about parenthetical text?
A. If the smiley doesn't end in ")", then just separate the
smiley from the ")" with a space or two.
If the smiley _does_ end in ")", then you can either use it to
end the parenthetical text, or leave a couple of spaces after
the smiley to separate it from the ")". I prefer the former,
since I like balanced parentheses, but many people don't care
one way or the other.
Both methods are in common use.
DaviD W. Sanderson (d...@ssec.wisc.edu)
"The Noah Webster of smileys is David Sanderson"
- The Wall Street Journal, 15 Sep 1992
Geoff Mccaughan
>Another example is a sad-parenthetical-smiley entry:
> I was doing foo (but bar was adamantly against it :-(
I use [] so I can say "I was doing foo [but bar was adamantly against it
8-(]
--
Geoff, Sysop Equinox (equinox.gen.nz) +64 (3) 3854406 [6 Lines]
Uncensored UseNet! Voice: +64 (3) 3852101
Vote SPQR Ski Nix Olympica Freedom for Axolotls
Chip Olson
>ig...@fg70.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de (Thomas Koenig) writes:
>>BTW, what's the official punctuation for smiley - end of sentence, is
>>it ":-)." or ".:-)" ?
>
>Neither, I should think, lest it looks like a smiley with (either) a
>(neck or brain) tumor.
Well, I use ":-)." (or ":-),", or whatever the indicated punctuation is.
>
>Another example is a sad-parenthetical-smiley entry:
>
> I was doing foo (but bar was adamantly against it :-(
>
>closing ')' is replaced with '(' to emphasize sadness.
>
> I was doing foo (but bar was adamantly against it :-()
>
>closing ')' is included; correct syntax, but it doesn't look like a
>sad-smiley anymore.
Well, you run across the same problem with happy-smileys: (yay! :-) or
(yay! :-))? The first one looks like the close paren is missing, and the
second is double-chinned.
My solution is to separate the actual close paren with a space: (yay! :-) )
Works with frowneys too: (waah! :-( ). I call it the One True Smiley Style.
--
-Chip Olson. | ol...@husc.harvard.edu | ceo@{gnu.ai,silver.lcs}.mit.edu
This article is a natural product. The slight variations in spelling and
grammar enhance its individual character and beauty and in no way are to
be considered flaws or defects.
Douglas W. Jones,201H MLH,3193350740,3193382879
by ol...@husc8.harvard.edu (Chip Olson):
>
> My solution is to separate the actual close paren with a space: (yay! :-) )
> Works with frowneys too: (waah! :-( ). I call it the One True Smiley Style.
Ah, but the :-) ) is a happy pregnant woman, and :-( ) is a sad man with
a beer belly. The gender of a smiley should be obvious to all but the
untutored.
Doug Jones
jo...@cs.uiowa.edu
iv...@cc.usu.edu
>
> If I do use it, how would I reconcile the question: "Why did you use
> )-: if you're *not* left handed ? Hmmm?"
Simple. Just claim that you _are_ left-handed. It's a network; we can't
_see_ you do anything.
Or, claim that you _were_ left-handed in a previous life...
Roger Ivie
iv...@cc.usu.edu
specialbrkfast
The solution to this is obvious: escape the ')' with a \\. Like so:
:-)\) and :-(\). What do you mean, not all shells use this? Huh?
Pathname delimiters? Don't make me laugh!
| Doug Jones
| jo...@cs.uiowa.edu
-- Sergej Roytman (MessyDOS double-plus ungood.)
Douglas W. Jones,201H MLH,3193350740,3193382879
by ft...@engin.umich.edu (specialbrkfast):
>
> The solution to this is obvious: escape the ')' with a \\. Like so:
> :-)\) and :-(\).
But the \ looks like a diagonal sash, so we have:
:-)\) -- happy pregnant woman wearing a sash.
:-(\) -- unhappy soldier with bandolier and beer belly.
Variants on these include
:-)\\) -- happy pregnant woman wearing a broad sash.
:-(\|) -- unhappy soldier with bandolier, with belt above his paunch.
Doug Jones
jo...@cs.uiowa.edu
Sergej Roytman
|From article <1pva5t...@srvr1.engin.umich.edu>,
|by ft...@engin.umich.edu (specialbrkfast):
|>
|> The solution to this is obvious: escape the ')' with a \\. Like so:
|> :-)\) and :-(\).
|
|But the \ looks like a diagonal sash, so we have:
| :-)\) -- happy pregnant woman wearing a sash.
| :-(\) -- unhappy soldier with bandolier and beer belly.
Philistine! Do you not recognize the True Unix and C Way? Do you not\n
automatically type control characters in normal text?\n\n
May you be stuck on an island somewhere with nothing but a Windoze box\n
whose only game is solitaire!\n\n
Just kidding :-) .
| Doug Jones
-- Sergej Roytman
Charles Olson
|> In article <1993Apr7.1...@news.uiowa.edu> jones@pyrite (Douglas W. Jones,201H MLH,3193350740,3193382879) writes:
|> |From article <OLSON.93A...@husc8.harvard.edu>,
|> |by ol...@husc8.harvard.edu (Chip Olson):
|> |>
|> |> My solution is to separate the actual close paren with a space: (yay! :-) )
|> |> Works with frowneys too: (waah! :-( ). I call it the One True Smiley Style.
|> |
|> |Ah, but the :-) ) is a happy pregnant woman, and :-( ) is a sad man with
|> |a beer belly. The gender of a smiley should be obvious to all but the
|> |untutored.
|>
|> The solution to this is obvious: escape the ')' with a \\. Like so:
|> :-)\) and :-(\). What do you mean, not all shells use this? Huh?
|> Pathname delimiters? Don't make me laugh!
But :-)\) is a happy man with a beer belly and a sword belt, and :-(/) is
a guy eating uncooked spaghetti.
Rachel Meredith Kadel
>
> (-: Now, of course, I could enclose humorous sentences in open and
> close smileys, like this one (remeniscent of the two different
> exclamation marks in Spanish), but somehow, I don't think it's really
> worth the effort :-).
I like that one . . . sometimes you need something at both ends to show
where you're joking and where you're serious.
>
> BTW, what's the official punctuation for smiley - end of sentence, is
> it ":-)." or ".:-)" ?
My preferred syntax is: A really foolish remark. :-)
Other ways make the period look like part of the smiley.
Rachel Meredith Kadel
Cottleston, cottleston, cottleston pie. \ Rachel Meredith Kadel
A fish can't whistle, and neither can I. \ Managing Sysop, PHSBBS
Ask me a riddle, and I reply \ rac...@phsbbs.princeton.nj.us
Cottleston, cottleston, cottleston pie. --A. A. Milne
If you post a followup, please mail it to me--my newsfeed's flaky.
Samuel Murphy
Excuse me, I believe you really intended:
>"haplology", yields "haplogy".-)
-Sam Murphy ;-}
Lon Stowell
>it ":-)." or ".:-)" ?
Avoid the whole thing by putting the smiley in brackets.
[ mumble, mumble, >:-) ]
DoN. Nichols
[ ... ]
>Finally, the following fully-parenthetical forms are frequently
>indications of a somewhat confused writer:
>
> I was doing foo (-: but bar was adamantly against it )-:
> I was doing foo :-( but bar was adamantly against it :-)
>
>Both are valid forms, but they are of limited utility.
Well ... I consider the first form to be equivalent to:
"I was doing foo (and really enjoying myself), but bar was adamantly against
it (and made me stop).
And the second form implies that foo was *not* a pleasant thing to be
doing, and therefore bar making me stop was quite welcome.
Of course, both of these require that bar has some controling power
in your life.
--
Email: <dnic...@d-and-d.com> | ...!uunet!ceilidh!dnichols
<dnic...@ceilidh.beartrack.com>
Donald Nichols (DoN.) | Voice (Days): (703) 704-2280 (Eves): (703) 938-4564
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---
DoN. Nichols
Nicholas Daniel Boyle
don't keyboards make you ambidexterous ?? :-)
l8r) <--- short for later
Nick
C H N O
8 10 4 2
--
+=========== Nicholas Boyle Email: u924...@wraith.cs.uow.edu.au ============+
| ?CAFFEINE NOT FOUND ERROR? | On a clear disk you can seek forever..... |
| PROGRAMMER HALTED. | Trimethylxanthine - not just a pretty word|
+====== Media Officer, Wollongong University Simulation Games Society =======+
--
+=========== Nicholas Boyle Email: u924...@wraith.cs.uow.edu.au ============+
| ?CAFFEINE NOT FOUND ERROR? | On a clear disk you can seek forever..... |
| PROGRAMMER HALTED. | Trimethylxanthine - not just a pretty word|
+====== Media Officer, Wollongong University Simulation Games Society =======+
bay...@force.ssd.lmsc.lockheed.com
> :-(\|) -- unhappy soldier with bandolier, with belt above his paunch.
Charles Shub
=> In article <1993Apr7.2...@news.uiowa.edu>, jones@pyrite (Douglas W. Jones,201H MLH,3193350740,3193382879) writes:
=> > :-(\|) -- unhappy soldier with bandolier, with belt above his paunch.
=> You mean the Sergeant from Disney's original Zorro?
no, those guys have 2 bandoliers
:-(X|)
we also discovered the following
:-( 8)
and have decided who it represents.
--
charlie shub cd...@cs.Colorado.EDU -or- (719) 593-3492
on leave at the University of Iowa cd...@cs.uiowa.edu (319) 335-0739
Steve Hunter
nomatch
- S
--
Steve Hunter - Radford University | "Argue for your limitations, and sure
shu...@rucs2.sunlab.cs.runet.edu | enough, they're yours!" -R. BACH