What does it mean for a name in parenthesis?

[fl]

Hi,
I see a female having part of her name in parenthesis, such as:

Mary E O'__ (Davis)


What is Davis on the full name?
Thanks,

[Don Phillipson]

"fl" <rxj...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:eaa21ecf-3983-40f3...@googlegroups.com...

1. Davis is usually the full surname.
2. A name in parenthesis might be the maiden name of a
married woman (i.e. her surname before adopting her
husband's surname on marriage) but we cannot be sure
unless we know the context.

--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)

[tonyco...@gmail.com]

Without additional context, it's impossible to tell.

However, in the funeral notices in the newspaper a woman's maiden name
is sometimes seen in parenthesis like that.

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

[Reinhold {Rey} Aman]

tonyco...@gmail.com wrote:

>
> fl wrote:
>>
>> I see a female having part of her name in parenthesis,
>>

ObAUE: parentheses

>
> a woman's maiden name is sometimes seen in parenthesis like that.
>

ObAUE: parentheses

(No charge.)

--
~~~ Reinhold {Rey} Aman ~~~

[Cheryl]

And in my part of the world, the name in parentheses would be the
child's spouse, as in "leaving to mourn her daughter Mary (John) and son
Michael (Susan)" Presumably anyone interested in offering condolences
knows the family well enough to come up with the surnames, since Mary at
least might well have a different one from her mother.

We sometimes get quite lengthy obituaries, some apparently listing all
relatives (including deceased ones) plus an assortment of "special
friends" and/or medical and nursing staff.

--
Cheryl

[Reinhold {Rey} Aman]

Don Phillipson wrote:
>
> 2. A name in parenthesis might be the maiden name
>

ObAUE: parentheses

[Charles Bishop]

In article <eaa21ecf-3983-40f3...@googlegroups.com>,

Context would help, but, I'm wondering if the blank (_____) was in the
original example, and if so, why. I've seen it in writing from Yore,
where a diary entry might read "Mary _______" would be a reminder but
not give the complete name in case Mary had been doing something she
oughtn't, but above, the blank (presumably) has a surname after it,
which would be a clue to identity.

--
charles

[Steve Hayes]

On Thu, 2 Jul 2015 15:22:08 -0700 (PDT), fl <rxj...@gmail.com> wrote:

The name in parenthesis could be a maiden name, if the married name
were given, but what the parenthesis means following a blank is
unclear.

So if it read "Mary E O'Brien (Davis)", the parenthetical name would
most likely be her maiden name, but when her unparenthetical name is
"____", it's anybody's guess.



--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk

[Reinhold {Rey} Aman]

Village Idiot Steve Hayes wrote:
>
> The name in parenthesis could be a maiden name,
>

Parentheses!

--
~~~ Reinhold {Rey} Aman ~~~

[Peter Moylan]

On 03/07/15 09:02, Don Phillipson wrote:
> "fl" <rxj...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:eaa21ecf-3983-40f3...@googlegroups.com...
>
>> Hi,
>> I see a female having part of her name in parenthesis, such as:
>>
>> Mary E O'__ (Davis)
>>
>> What is Davis on the full name?
>
> 1. Davis is usually the full surname.
> 2. A name in parenthesis might be the maiden name of a
> married woman (i.e. her surname before adopting her
> husband's surname on marriage) but we cannot be sure
> unless we know the context.

Or conversely. Sometimes the maiden name is given, followed by the
husband's surname in parentheses. Some people keep their genealogical
records this way, although I've never seen the point because you'll see
the husband's name anyway when the tree is displayed.

--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia

[Peter Moylan]

On 03/07/15 14:56, Steve Hayes wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Jul 2015 15:22:08 -0700 (PDT), fl <rxj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> I see a female having part of her name in parenthesis, such as:
>>
>> Mary E O'__ (Davis)
>>
>>
>> What is Davis on the full name?
>
> The name in parenthesis could be a maiden name, if the married name
> were given, but what the parenthesis means following a blank is
> unclear.
>
> So if it read "Mary E O'Brien (Davis)", the parenthetical name would
> most likely be her maiden name, but when her unparenthetical name is
> "____", it's anybody's guess.

It might mean that her maiden name is unknown.

[Steve Hayes]

Possible, I suppose, but I haven't often seen it that way round.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Friday, July 3, 2015 at 1:24:39 AM UTC-4, Slanderer Reinhold {Rey} Aman wrote:
> Village Idiot Steve Hayes wrote:

> > The name in parenthesis could be a maiden name,
> >
> Parentheses!

In case you STILL haven't noticed, NO ONE CARES.

[Reinhold {Rey} Aman]

Snippy little bitch PeteY Daniels wrote:
>
> Slanderer Reinhold {Rey} Aman wrote:
>> Village Idiot Steve Hayes wrote:
>>>
>>> The name in parenthesis could be a maiden name,
>>>
>> Parentheses!
>
> In case you STILL haven't noticed, NO ONE CARES.
>

Wrong! What a *stupid* comment!

Fuck off and die already, you snippy little bickering bitch.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Friday, July 3, 2015 at 11:51:49 AM UTC-4, Reinhold {Rey} Aman wrote:
> Snippy little bitch PeteY Daniels wrote:
> > Slanderer Reinhold {Rey} Aman wrote:
> >> Village Idiot Steve Hayes wrote:

> >>> The name in parenthesis could be a maiden name,
> >> Parentheses!
> > In case you STILL haven't noticed, NO ONE CARES.
> Wrong! What a *stupid* comment!

The nonstandard spelling continues to appear. Probably, by now, to spite you.

> Fuck off and die already, you snippy little bickering bitch.

How do you manage to resist the morphine overdoses your disgusted caretakers
in the lunatic asylum must regularly give you?

[Steve Hayes]

If you hadn't quoted the troll I would not have seen what it said, and
in any case, it's wrong, wrong, wrongity wrong.

The primary meaning of "parenthesis" is what goes inside the brackets,
rather than an alternative name for the brackets themselves.

parenthesis n. Word, clause, sentence, inserted into a passage to
which it is not grammatically essential, and usu. marked off by
brackets, dashes or commas; (sing. or pl) round brackets used for
this. (COD)

[Peter Moylan]

In case YOU haven't noticed, this is a group where we care about English
usage. The "anything goes" group is down the hall.

[Peter Moylan]

On 04/07/15 14:34, Steve Hayes wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Jul 2015 06:52:57 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
> <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>> On Friday, July 3, 2015 at 1:24:39 AM UTC-4, Slanderer Reinhold {Rey} Aman wrote:
>>> Village Idiot Steve Hayes wrote:
>>
>>>> The name in parenthesis could be a maiden name,
>>>>
>>> Parentheses!
>>
>> In case you STILL haven't noticed, NO ONE CARES.
>
> If you hadn't quoted the troll I would not have seen what it said, and
> in any case, it's wrong, wrong, wrongity wrong.
>
> The primary meaning of "parenthesis" is what goes inside the brackets,
> rather than an alternative name for the brackets themselves.
>
> parenthesis n. Word, clause, sentence, inserted into a passage to
> which it is not grammatically essential, and usu. marked off by
> brackets, dashes or commas; (sing. or pl) round brackets used for
> this. (COD)

That argument might have worked if you hadn't written "the name in
parenthesis".

[Alberto]

Parenthesis vs. parentheses
---------------------------
>
*Village Idiot* Steve Hayes drooled:

>
> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>> Slanderer Reinhold {Rey} Aman wrote:
>>> Village Idiot Steve Hayes wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The name in parenthesis could be a maiden name,
>>>>
>>> Parentheses!
>>
>> In case you STILL haven't noticed, NO ONE CARES.
>
> If you hadn't quoted the troll I would not have seen what it said,
> and in any case, it's wrong, wrong, wrongity wrong.
>

Like FUCK it's wrong, you fuckin' stupid village idiot!

"The name *IN* parentheses" {corrected -R.A.}

means the name is *IN* ( ).

>
> The primary meaning of "parenthesis" is what goes inside the brackets,
>

Wrong, wrong, wrongity wrong, you fuckin' village idiot!

The *primary* meaning of "parenthesis" is:
"an upright curved line": ( or ).

>
> rather than an alternative name for the brackets themselves.
>
> parenthesis n. Word, clause, sentence, inserted into a passage to
> which it is not grammatically essential, and usu. marked off by
> brackets, dashes or commas; (sing. or pl) round brackets used for
> this. (COD)
>

That's a *secondary* meaning, which *here* is irrelevant:

"The name *IN* parentheses"
^^
See the preposition *IN*, you fuckin' asshole?

Something which is *IN* parentheses is surrounded by two parentheses,
one before ( and one after, ) e.g.:

(Steve Hayes is a fuckin' village idiot)

"Steve Hayes is a fuckin' village idiot" is *IN* parentheses, the
opening parenthesis ( and the closing parenthesis ).

[Steve Hayes]

?

I'm not sure how anything I wrote would affect that argument.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 12:28:31 AM UTC-4, Steve Hayes wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Jul 2015 06:52:57 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
> <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >On Friday, July 3, 2015 at 1:24:39 AM UTC-4, Slanderer Reinhold {Rey} Aman wrote:
> >> Village Idiot Steve Hayes wrote:

> >> > The name in parenthesis could be a maiden name,
> >> Parentheses!
> >In case you STILL haven't noticed, NO ONE CARES.
>
> If you hadn't quoted the troll I would not have seen what it said, and
> in any case, it's wrong, wrong, wrongity wrong.

Uh-oh, don't tell _it_ that!

> The primary meaning of "parenthesis" is what goes inside the brackets,
> rather than an alternative name for the brackets themselves.
>
> parenthesis n. Word, clause, sentence, inserted into a passage to
> which it is not grammatically essential, and usu. marked off by
> brackets, dashes or commas; (sing. or pl) round brackets used for
> this. (COD)

In that sense, "in the parenthesis" would be more natural. Maybe you could
treat it like "in camera" and italicize "in parenthesis."

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 2:07:05 AM UTC-4, Peter Moylan wrote:
> On 03/07/15 23:52, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > On Friday, July 3, 2015 at 1:24:39 AM UTC-4, Slanderer Reinhold {Rey} Aman wrote:
> >> Village Idiot Steve Hayes wrote:

> >>> The name in parenthesis could be a maiden name,
> >> Parentheses!
> > In case you STILL haven't noticed, NO ONE CARES.
>
> In case YOU haven't noticed, this is a group where we care about English
> usage. The "anything goes" group is down the hall.

Yet the sociopath's continual whining about the word has had no effect.

[Charles Bishop]

In article <mn7upe$68l$1...@news.albasani.net>,

Alberto <am#a#n@so#n#ic.net> wrote:

> Parenthesis vs. parentheses
> ---------------------------
> >
> *Village Idiot* Steve Hayes drooled:
> >
> > Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >> Slanderer Reinhold {Rey} Aman wrote:
> >>> Village Idiot Steve Hayes wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> The name in parenthesis could be a maiden name,
> >>>>
> >>> Parentheses!
> >>
> >> In case you STILL haven't noticed, NO ONE CARES.
> >
> > If you hadn't quoted the troll I would not have seen what it said,
> > and in any case, it's wrong, wrong, wrongity wrong.
> >
> Like FUCK it's wrong, you fuckin' stupid village idiot!

No reason to read further.

chafles, nor to reply

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

On 2015-07-04 10:32:30 +0000, Steve Hayes said:

[ … ]

>>>>
>>>>>> The name in parenthesis could be a maiden name,
>>>>>>
>>>>> Parentheses!
>>>>

>>>> [ … ]

>> That argument might have worked if you hadn't written "the name in
>> parenthesis".
>
> ?
>
> I'm not sure how anything I wrote would affect that argument.

I think he's referring to the word "in", which clearly shows that you
were referring to the punctuation around the parenthesis, i.e. to the
parentheses, not to the parenthesis itself.

Anyway, he's right.


--
athel

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

On 2015-07-04 06:07:01 +0000, Peter Moylan said:

> On 03/07/15 23:52, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>> On Friday, July 3, 2015 at 1:24:39 AM UTC-4, Slanderer Reinhold {Rey}
>> Aman wrote:
>>> Village Idiot Steve Hayes wrote:
>>
>>>> The name in parenthesis could be a maiden name,
>>>>
>>> Parentheses!
>>
>> In case you STILL haven't noticed, NO ONE CARES.
>
> In case YOU haven't noticed, this is a group where we care about English
> usage. The "anything goes" group is down the hall.

+1. I certainly care about English usage.


--
athel

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

More generally, we can't really know the point of the parenthesis

unless we know the context.

It may indicate a maiden name, as with "Hillary Clinton (Rodham)".
It may indicate the name under someone is best known, as with
"François-Marie Arouet (Voltaire)"
It may indicate the real name of a performer, as with "John Wayne
(Marion Michael Morrison)"
It may indicate that someone prefers to be known under a different
names, as with "Cassius Clay (Mohamed Ali)"
It may refer to a name (often Chinese) that is regarded as
unpronounceable in the country where they are living, as with (various
people I know, but I can't think of a famous one).

etc. Without a context it's impossible to know.



--
athel

[Reinhold {Rey} Aman]

And thereby remain ignorant.

[Steve Hayes]

A parenthesis can be a word, a phrase, or the brackets enclosing them.

But I referred to the word in parethesis. Or would it be better, in
your view, to say "the word in the parenthesis"? Or "the parenthetical
word"?

[Steve Hayes]

On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 06:37:30 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"

How about _in loco parenthesis_?

Would that satisfy you (and Athel)?

[tonyco...@gmail.com]

On Sat, 04 Jul 2015 21:01:40 +0200, Steve Hayes
<haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote:

>On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 18:46:29 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden
><acor...@imm.cnrs.fr> wrote:
>
>>On 2015-07-04 10:32:30 +0000, Steve Hayes said:
>>
>>[ … ]
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The name in parenthesis could be a maiden name,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Parentheses!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [ … ]
>>
>>>> That argument might have worked if you hadn't written "the name in
>>>> parenthesis".
>>>
>>> ?
>>>
>>> I'm not sure how anything I wrote would affect that argument.
>>
>>I think he's referring to the word "in", which clearly shows that you
>>were referring to the punctuation around the parenthesis, i.e. to the
>>parentheses, not to the parenthesis itself.
>>
>>Anyway, he's right.
>
>A parenthesis can be a word, a phrase, or the brackets enclosing them.
>
>But I referred to the word in parethesis. Or would it be better, in
>your view, to say "the word in the parenthesis"? Or "the parenthetical
>word"?

I've always referred to what is enclosed by the parentheses marks as a
"parenthetical expression" or a "parenthentical term".

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

[Peter T. Daniels]

What no one cares about is the sociopath's continual whining.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 2:57:30 PM UTC-4, Steve Hayes wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 06:37:30 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
> <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >On Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 12:28:31 AM UTC-4, Steve Hayes wrote:
> >> On Fri, 3 Jul 2015 06:52:57 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
> >> <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >> >On Friday, July 3, 2015 at 1:24:39 AM UTC-4, Slanderer Reinhold {Rey} Aman wrote:
> >> >> Village Idiot Steve Hayes wrote:

> >> >> > The name in parenthesis could be a maiden name,
> >> >> Parentheses!
> >> >In case you STILL haven't noticed, NO ONE CARES.
> >> If you hadn't quoted the troll I would not have seen what it said, and
> >> in any case, it's wrong, wrong, wrongity wrong.
> >Uh-oh, don't tell _it_ that!
> >> The primary meaning of "parenthesis" is what goes inside the brackets,
> >> rather than an alternative name for the brackets themselves.
> >> parenthesis n. Word, clause, sentence, inserted into a passage to
> >> which it is not grammatically essential, and usu. marked off by
> >> brackets, dashes or commas; (sing. or pl) round brackets used for
> >> this. (COD)
> >In that sense, "in the parenthesis" would be more natural. Maybe you could
> >treat it like "in camera" and italicize "in parenthesis."
>
> How about _in loco parenthesis_?
>
> Would that satisfy you (and Athel)?

I'm pretty sure I've seen that joke before.

[Robert Bannister]

I think the full phrase is "it is written in parenthesis", meaning "it"
has been written as a kind of in-line footnote which may or may not be
separated off from the rest of the sentence by commas or dashes or
whatever. I do not believe that "in parenthesis" refers to any of these
punctuation marks, but I don't know Greek so I can't tell whether this
goes back to an expression in that language.

--
Robert Bannister
Perth, Western Australia

[Reinhold {Rey} Aman]

Mentally ill PeteY Tommy Daniels whined:
>
> Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
>> Peter Moylan said:

>>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>>> Slanderer Reinhold {Rey} Aman wrote:
>>>>> Village Idiot Steve Hayes wrote:
>
>>>>>> The name in parenthesis could be a maiden name,
>
>>>>> Parentheses!
>
>>>> In case you STILL haven't noticed, NO ONE CARES.
>
>>> In case YOU haven't noticed, this is a group where we care about
>>> English usage. The "anything goes" group is down the hall.
>>
>> +1. I certainly care about English usage.
>
> What no one cares about is the sociopath's continual whining.
>

Just what *is* that mentally ill cocksucker PeteY whining about?

[R H Draney]

Robert Bannister <rob...@clubtelco.com> wrote in news:cvrbv1Fub9rU1
@mid.individual.net:

> I think the full phrase is "it is written in parenthesis", meaning "it"
> has been written as a kind of in-line footnote which may or may not be
> separated off from the rest of the sentence by commas or dashes or
> whatever. I do not believe that "in parenthesis" refers to any of these
> punctuation marks, but I don't know Greek so I can't tell whether this
> goes back to an expression in that language.

Yes..."in parenthesis" = "in a sort of superfluous or annotative
context"...the singular *is* inappropriate when the preposition is
"between", because then "parenthesis" can only mean one (and only one!) of
the typographical marks used to set off such a word or phrase....r

[Steve Hayes]

On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 16:45:14 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"

Whether you have or not, I'm just trying to understand why some people
seem to think referring to a word as being "in parenthesis" is somehow
wrong, and how they think it *should* be said, and why.

Thoough it is not exactly analogous, I might refer to a remark made
"in passing". I would not say that it was made "in passings", or "in a
passing" or "in the passing".

[Peter T. Daniels]

Each of the two curvy things is one parenthesis. (In AmE. I think Brits call
them "round brackets" or some such.) Thus what you write between them is in
parentheses. But also, a parenthesis is an interpolation into a sentence that's
not syntactically connected to the sentence. If it's more emphatic than usual,
it might be between dashes rather than between parentheses.

[Dr Nick]

They are saying it's wrong because they are viewing the parenthetical
remark as being enclosed in two parentheses (the brackets). They are
right that it is enclosed in parentheses.

> Thoough it is not exactly analogous, I might refer to a remark made
> "in passing". I would not say that it was made "in passings", or "in a
> passing" or "in the passing".

By which argument you are also right that the comment is made in a
single parenthesis. I'm pretty sure myE doesn't allow me to say "in
parenthesis" for this, but you can claim WS Gilbert in your defence.

So you are right and they are right and everything is quite correct.

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

Lurking in the undergrowth of computing terminology, in some contexts
"(" is known as "paren", and ")" as "thesis".

--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)

[R H Draney]

"Peter Duncanson [BrE]" <ma...@peterduncanson.net> wrote in
news:lh4ipadgic751uv1g...@4ax.com:

> Lurking in the undergrowth of computing terminology, in some contexts
> "(" is known as "paren", and ")" as "thesis".

I believe the Jargon File also defines "<" as "bra" and ">" as "ket"....r

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

I can't find that in the Jargon File.
However:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bra%E2%80%93ket_notation

In quantum mechanics, bra–ket notation is a standard notation for
describing quantum states, composed of angle brackets and vertical
bars.

The notation was introduced in 1939 by Paul Dirac

It is likely that describing "<" as "bra" and ">" as "ket" has been
adopted outside quantum mechanics.

[Steve Hayes]

Aye, but in this case I was referring to the word in parenthesis, as
opposed to the one in the main sentence (which was "_____").

It would still have been the word in parenthesis if it had been set
off from the rest of the sentence by dashes or some other symbol.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Sunday, July 5, 2015 at 7:40:10 AM UTC-4, R H Draney wrote:
> "Peter Duncanson [BrE]" <ma...@peterduncanson.net> wrote in
> news:lh4ipadgic751uv1g...@4ax.com:
>
> > Lurking in the undergrowth of computing terminology, in some contexts
> > "(" is known as "paren", and ")" as "thesis".

Good grief.

> I believe the Jargon File also defines "<" as "bra" and ">" as "ket"....r

Then what do they call "[" and "]"?

[Charles Bishop]

In article <cvqh2m...@mid.individual.net>,

I do to, but admittedly, to a lesser extent than others, though I try
not to meddle in the affairs of word wizards, I'll often offer up a
comment, from the common folk, like.

--
cjar;es

[Jerry Friedman]

On 7/4/15 1:01 PM, Steve Hayes wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 18:46:29 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden
> <acor...@imm.cnrs.fr> wrote:
>
>> On 2015-07-04 10:32:30 +0000, Steve Hayes said:
>>
>> [ … ]
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The name in parenthesis could be a maiden name,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Parentheses!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [ … ]
>>
>>>> That argument might have worked if you hadn't written "the name in
>>>> parenthesis".
>>>
>>> ?
>>>
>>> I'm not sure how anything I wrote would affect that argument.
>>
>> I think he's referring to the word "in", which clearly shows that you
>> were referring to the punctuation around the parenthesis, i.e. to the
>> parentheses, not to the parenthesis itself.
>>
>> Anyway, he's right.
>
> A parenthesis can be a word, a phrase, or the brackets enclosing them.
>
> But I referred to the word in parethesis. Or would it be better, in
> your view, to say "the word in the parenthesis"? Or "the parenthetical
> word"?

In my view, those would have been better.


--
Jerry Friedman

[R H Draney]

"Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> wrote in
news:5326e5e0-748a-4e63...@googlegroups.com:

"Morecambe" and "Wise"?...r

[Janet]

In article <6tpgpa5ej8i9leskb...@4ax.com>, tonycooper214
@gmail.com says...

>
> On Sat, 04 Jul 2015 21:01:40 +0200, Steve Hayes
> <haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>
> >On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 18:46:29 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden
> ><acor...@imm.cnrs.fr> wrote:
> >
> >>On 2015-07-04 10:32:30 +0000, Steve Hayes said:
> >>

> >>[ ? ]

> >>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> The name in parenthesis could be a maiden name,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Parentheses!
> >>>>>>

> >>>>>> [ ? ]

> >>
> >>>> That argument might have worked if you hadn't written "the name in
> >>>> parenthesis".
> >>>
> >>> ?
> >>>
> >>> I'm not sure how anything I wrote would affect that argument.
> >>
> >>I think he's referring to the word "in", which clearly shows that you
> >>were referring to the punctuation around the parenthesis, i.e. to the
> >>parentheses, not to the parenthesis itself.
> >>
> >>Anyway, he's right.
> >
> >A parenthesis can be a word, a phrase, or the brackets enclosing them.
> >
> >But I referred to the word in parethesis. Or would it be better, in
> >your view, to say "the word in the parenthesis"? Or "the parenthetical
> >word"?
>
> I've always referred to what is enclosed by the parentheses marks as a
> "parenthetical expression" or a "parenthentical term".

I've always called a paranthetical expression "the bit in brackets".

Janet

[anal...@hotmail.com]

I have been looking for a segue to record the fact that I knew someone who thought the singular of "parentheses" is "parenthese" - and this is the perfect spot.

[Steve Hayes]

They look clumsy to me, but suum cuique.

[R H Draney]

anal...@hotmail.com wrote in
news:b19718eb-dc85-4a59...@googlegroups.com:

> I have been looking for a segue to record the fact that I knew someone
> who thought the singular of "parentheses" is "parenthese" - and this
> is the perfect spot.

I keep looking for an opportunity at dinner to throw out the question
"what's the singular of 'tamales'?"...r

[Robert Bannister]

And yet, in the English language, most parentheses are set off by one or
two commas rather than round brackets.

[Peter Moylan]

On 06/07/15 09:27, Steve Hayes wrote:
> On Sun, 05 Jul 2015 09:19:54 -0600, Jerry Friedman
> <jerry_f...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> On 7/4/15 1:01 PM, Steve Hayes wrote:
>>> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 18:46:29 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden
>>> <acor...@imm.cnrs.fr> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2015-07-04 10:32:30 +0000, Steve Hayes said:
>>>>
>>>> [ … ]
>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The name in parenthesis could be a maiden name,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Parentheses!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [ … ]
>>>>
>>>>>> That argument might have worked if you hadn't written "the name in
>>>>>> parenthesis".
>>>>>
>>>>> ?
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not sure how anything I wrote would affect that argument.
>>>>
>>>> I think he's referring to the word "in", which clearly shows that you
>>>> were referring to the punctuation around the parenthesis, i.e. to the
>>>> parentheses, not to the parenthesis itself.
>>>>
>>>> Anyway, he's right.
>>>
>>> A parenthesis can be a word, a phrase, or the brackets enclosing them.
>>>
>>> But I referred to the word in parethesis. Or would it be better, in
>>> your view, to say "the word in the parenthesis"? Or "the parenthetical
>>> word"?
>>
>> In my view, those would have been better.
>
> They look clumsy to me, but suum cuique.

I'm happy to use parenthesis to mean the parenthetical part. Where I
differ from you is that I'm uncomfortable calling something at the
beginning or the end of a sentence a parenthesis. For me it has to be
something inserted in the middle.

--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia

[Steve Hayes]

Is there another name for something at the end of a sentence?

In-line footnote, perhaps (Testew & Cunard 1964:23)?

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Until you threw out your challenge I assumed it would "tamale", but
then I thought that "tamal" was more likely, and apparently that's what
it is.


--
athel

[Mark Brader]

Athel Cornish-Bowden (copyedited):
> It may indicate that someone prefers to be known under a different name,

Or has gone through the legal procedure to change their name.

> as with "Cassius Clay (Mohamed Ali)"

I don't know which one is the actual case for him, but I know it's
spelled Muhammad Ali.
--
Mark Brader | "A colorful quilt reflecting the dispersed development
m...@vex.net | of the nation. A sentence fragment."
Toronto | --Eric Walker

My text in this article is in the public domain.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

On 2015-07-06 21:48:34 +0200, m...@vex.net (Mark Brader) said:

> Athel Cornish-Bowden (copyedited):
>> It may indicate that someone prefers to be known under a different name,
>
> Or has gone through the legal procedure to change their name.
>
>> as with "Cassius Clay (Mohamed Ali)"
>
> I don't know which one is the actual case for him, but I know it's
> spelled Muhammad Ali.

You seem to be right, but I checked before posting, and the spelling I
used was the one used in the source:
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohamed_Ali_(boxe_anglaise). Probably I'd
have done better to find an English-language page, but Google insists
on putting French pages first on my computer at home, regardless of
what preferences I have set.


--
athel

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

On 2015-07-06 21:05:39 +0200, Lewis <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> said:

> In message <cvvdf3...@mid.individual.net>

> This is inconsistent, and I have seen both tamal and tamale on menus in
> restaurants in Mexico. Around here (Denver) tamale is more common. I
> *think* tamal was more common in Mexico, but I am not sure on that one.
> It may depend on the type/caliber of restaurant, or the number of
> turistas they get.
>
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamale>
> "(tamal redirects here)"

That tells us the usual singular of the word in English, which no one
doubts. For the singular of the Spanish word I'd be more inclined to
trust this: https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamal.

--
athel

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

Have you tried using this?
http://www.google.co.uk/

It might or might not help depending on how "helpful" Google is.

[Peter Moylan]

Are you using Firefox? In the Firefox options, the "Content" tab has a
button that lets you choose your preferred language. According to a
brief test I've just done, Google respects that preference.

[Charles Bishop]

In article <slrnmplken....@amelia.local>,

Lewis <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> In message <cvvdf3...@mid.individual.net>
> Athel Cornish-Bowden <athe...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> This is inconsistent, and I have seen both tamal and tamale on menus in
> restaurants in Mexico. Around here (Denver) tamale is more common. I
> *think* tamal was more common in Mexico, but I am not sure on that one.
> It may depend on the type/caliber of restaurant, or the number of
> turistas they get.

When I was learning Spanish, it was tamal which I thought was
interesting. I haven't paid attention lately, but tamale is in the
majority when I've seen it printed, I think.

It's probably an example of the expected word driving out the original
word.

>
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamale>
> "(tamal redirects here)"

--
charles

[Mark Brader]

Mark Brader:
>> ...it's spelled Muhammad Ali.

Athel Cornish-Bowden:

> You seem to be right, but I checked before posting, and the spelling I
> used was the one used in the source:
> https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohamed_Ali_(boxe_anglaise).

Ah, interesting. We expect place names to be spelled differently in
French sometimes (Italie), and personal names that are transliterated
from another alphabet (Boris Eltsine), but I would not have expected
it to happen for a personal name in the same alphabet. And given that
he's American, I presume he did spell it in our alphabet to start with.

Wikipedia's English-language article about him has links to articles
in 53 other languages written using Latin-based alphabets. Of these,
46 links [1] use the spelling "Muhammad Ali" (or the same with the
two names reversed) and 7 do not. As noted, French has "Mohamed";
Scottish Gaelic and Turkish both have "Muhammed"; Somali has "Mohammed";
Latvian has "Muhameds"; Latin has "Mahometus"; and in Azerbaijani
it seems that schwa is a letter, which I'll write here as @, and
the name is "M@h@mm@d @li".

Of course, this is not what you'd call a definitive and reliable
source, but I think it's probably indicative.


The second reason it's interesting is "boxe anglaise". For a moment
I thought "boxe" meant boxer and they'd mistaken his nationality,
but of course that's not it. "Boxe" means "boxing" and, according
to French Wikipedia, is sometimes used to include a wider range of
sports than the one that we call boxing -- and they call English
boxing.

In particular, there is "American boxing"; I found things a bit hard
to follow here, but I think they're saying it means kickboxing.

> Probably I'd have done better to find an English-language page,
> but Google insists on putting French pages first on my computer

> at home...

Well, if you're going to use Wikipedia as your source, you could
always add site:en.wikipedia.org to your search.


[1] Afrikaans, Albanian, Asturian, Basque, Bikol Central, Bosnian,
Breton, Catalan, Croatian, Czech, Danish, Dutch, Esperanto,
Estonian, Finnish, West Flemish, Western Frisian, Galician, German,
Hungarian, Indonesian, Irish Gaelic, Italian, Javanese, Lithuanian,
Malay, Norwegian, Occitan, Polish, Portuguese, Quechua, Romanian,
Sardinian, Scots, Serbo-Croatian, Sicilian, Slovak, Slovenian,
Spanish, Swahili, Swedish, Tagalog, Uzbek, Waray, Welsh, and Yoruba.
--
Mark Brader I'm not pompous; I'm pedantic.
Toronto Let me explain it to you.
m...@vex.net --Mary Kay Kare

[Phil Carmody]

Neither here nor in Finland does Firefox's "English, motherfucker,
do you serve it?" setting actually work for google search results.
This might be because I reject all cookies from the scumbags.

Phil, user of DuckDuckGo nowadays.
--
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state,
the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall be well regulated.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

On 2015-07-08 16:55:14 +0200, Phil Carmody <pc+u...@asdf.org> said:

> Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> writes:
>> On 07/07/15 21:07, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
>>> On 2015-07-06 21:48:34 +0200, m...@vex.net (Mark Brader) said:
>>>
>>>> Athel Cornish-Bowden (copyedited):
>>>>> It may indicate that someone prefers to be known under a different name,
>>>>
>>>> Or has gone through the legal procedure to change their name.
>>>>
>>>>> as with "Cassius Clay (Mohamed Ali)"
>>>>
>>>> I don't know which one is the actual case for him, but I know it's
>>>> spelled Muhammad Ali.
>>>
>>> You seem to be right, but I checked before posting, and the spelling I
>>> used was the one used in the source:
>>> https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohamed_Ali_(boxe_anglaise). Probably I'd
>>> have done better to find an English-language page, but Google insists on
>>> putting French pages first on my computer at home, regardless of what
>>> preferences I have set.
>>
>> Are you using Firefox? In the Firefox options, the "Content" tab has a
>> button that lets you choose your preferred language. According to a
>> brief test I've just done, Google respects that preference.
>
> Neither here nor in Finland does Firefox's "English, motherfucker,
> do you serve it?" setting actually work for google search results.
> This might be because I reject all cookies from the scumbags.
>
> Phil, user of DuckDuckGo nowadays.

Good idea. I was using DuckDuckGo for a while (and I still have it in
my drop-down menu), but I'd forgotten about it.


--
athel

[Jerry Friedman]

On 7/8/15 9:29 AM, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> On 2015-07-08 16:55:14 +0200, Phil Carmody <pc+u...@asdf.org> said:

...

>> Phil, user of DuckDuckGo nowadays.
>
> Good idea. I was using DuckDuckGo for a while (and I still have it in my
> drop-down menu), but I'd forgotten about it.

I hate to say this, but if I were part of the government-megacorporation
conspiracy and I wanted to keep an eye on the people with something to
hide, I'd produce a search program that claimed it didn't keep track of
people's searches.
--
Jerry Friedman

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Probably. However, I'm not that bothered at the thought of having
security agencies track my searches. If they have nothing more
interesting to do, who am I to deny them some innocent amusement?


--
athel

[Oliver Cromm]

* Athel Cornish-Bowden:

Until recently, DuckDuckGo wasn't doing a good job on any other
language, so I was using it in English only. But recently, it has
started preferring the languages set to preferred in Firefox, so
it often gives me many useless German results on searches where I
want English ones. I'm a difficult person to cater to.

Google, OTOH, seems to go with its own language preference
settings for me, but that may be because English is one of the
local languages. Just to be sure, did you set it here:

<https://www.google.com/preferences?fg=1#languages>

You can choose different settings for google.com, google.co.uk
etc.

--
Skyler: Uncle Cosmo ... why do they call this a word processor?
Cosmo: It's simple, Skyler ... you've seen what food processors
do to food, right?
Cartoon by Jeff MacNelley

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Wednesday, July 8, 2015 at 10:55:16 AM UTC-4, Phil Carmody wrote:

> Neither here nor in Finland does Firefox's "English, motherfucker,
> do you serve it?" setting actually work for google search results.
> This might be because I reject all cookies from the scumbags.

Then you probably shouldn't complain.

> Phil, user of DuckDuckGo nowadays.

I first heard of it from Thom Hartmann. He never explained why anything with
such a dumb name should be taken seriously.

[Robert Bannister]

It seems pretty stupid that you can't pick more than one language,
although I do notice that if my question is in German, for example, most
of the results are in German despite having English chosen in the setting.

[Charles Bishop]

In article <d051nq...@mid.individual.net>,

The FBI was testifying today that it would be very bad if strong
encryption was allowed since they could keep an eye on the badies. Oh,
and of course, citizens have nothing to fear since it would take a
warrant to look at their communications.

--
charles

[Peter Moylan]

On 09/07/15 00:55, Phil Carmody wrote:

> Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> writes:

>> Are you using Firefox? In the Firefox options, the "Content" tab has a
>> button that lets you choose your preferred language. According to a
>> brief test I've just done, Google respects that preference.
>
> Neither here nor in Finland does Firefox's "English, motherfucker,
> do you serve it?" setting actually work for google search results.
> This might be because I reject all cookies from the scumbags.
>
> Phil, user of DuckDuckGo nowadays.

This surprises me, because no cookies should be needed. The "preferred
language" is built into the HTTP protocol, and is supplied by your
browser as a parameter each time it requests a page from a server. If
you want to see this in action, try the "Family tree" link on my web
site. The labels in the display change depending on how you've set the
language preference in your browser, provided that the language is one
of the small set the software supports. I wrote that software myself, so
I know that no cookies are used.

Before writing the above, I changed my preferred language in Firefox and
then did a Google search. It worked.

Oliver suggested a language setting at
https://www.google.com/preferences?fg=1#languages
That one probably does use cookies, but I've never set a preference
there because I don't like the way Google collects information about me.
Besides, it's redundant: it works only for Google, and it tries to
override a feature that your browser already has. You can probably
cancel that setting by deleting cookies, in which case the browser
settings should take over.

[Steve Hayes]

I've not heard of Thom Hartmann, but I've used DuckDuckGo when Google
can't find what I'm looking for, since DDG is an aggregation of the
results of several search engines. But I prefer Google's display of
the results of a ssearch.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Thursday, July 9, 2015 at 1:53:26 AM UTC-4, Steve Hayes wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Jul 2015 10:23:18 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
> <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >On Wednesday, July 8, 2015 at 10:55:16 AM UTC-4, Phil Carmody wrote:

> >> Neither here nor in Finland does Firefox's "English, motherfucker,
> >> do you serve it?" setting actually work for google search results.
> >> This might be because I reject all cookies from the scumbags.
> >Then you probably shouldn't complain.
> >> Phil, user of DuckDuckGo nowadays.
> >I first heard of it from Thom Hartmann. He never explained why anything with
> >such a dumb name should be taken seriously.
>
> I've not heard of Thom Hartmann,

A leftist radio talk show host formerly heard in NYC.

> but I've used DuckDuckGo when Google
> can't find what I'm looking for, since DDG is an aggregation of the
> results of several search engines. But I prefer Google's display of
> the results of a ssearch.

It's still a ridiculous name.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

On 2015-07-07 23:22:49 +0200, Lewis <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> said:

> In message <d01qfe...@mid.individual.net>
> Athel Cornish-Bowden <athe...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
[ ... ]

>>>
>>>> Until you threw out your challenge I assumed it would "tamale", but
>>>> then I thought that "tamal" was more likely, and apparently that's what
>>>> it is.
>>>
>>> This is inconsistent, and I have seen both tamal and tamale on menus in
>>> restaurants in Mexico. Around here (Denver) tamale is more common. I
>>> *think* tamal was more common in Mexico, but I am not sure on that one.
>>> It may depend on the type/caliber of restaurant, or the number of
>>> turistas they get.
>>>
>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamale>
>>> "(tamal redirects here)"
>
>> That tells us the usual singular of the word in English, which no one
>> doubts. For the singular of the Spanish word I'd be more inclined to
>> trust this: https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamal.
>

> Yes, but what is "officially" correct in Spanish is not necessarily
> indicative of what is used by regular people. I'm sure that in both 2003
> and 2007 I saw "tamale" on menus in Mexico.

I checked in the Dictionary of the Royal Academy today, and it doesn't
mention "tamale" even as a rare variant. I wouldn't be at all surprised
if there are restaurants in Mexico that have picked up the word in the
US.

I can't off-hand think of _any_ masculine nouns that end in "ale". That
doesn't mean there aren't any, of course, but "tamale" looks more
Italian to me than Spanish.

>
> For example, my Spanish (albeit poor) is considered very stilted and
> old fashioned in Mexico where the polite Ud form is nearly as dead as
> the Vos. form has been for over a century.

Ud. in all its forms, or just in the singular? Uds. is alive and well
in Chile as (effectively) the plural of tu, but in the singular it
would, as you say, be regarded as stilted.
>
> People will still use Ud with their parents or their priest, and maybe
> with their boss, but otherwise the tu form is everywhere, even on
> advertising billboards and shop signs.
>
> Spelling is also much more fluid in day to day use. I've seen restaurant
> signs with multiple spellings of the same word (Horchata / orchata /
> orxata). It's not that one spelling (Horchata) is not the correct
> spelling and others are accepted alternates, it's just that people care
> a lot less about spelling when it doesn't affect the pronunciation of
> the word. A sign painter is much more likely to get the accents correct
> and replace an x with a j or leave out an h and probably will not have
> bands of pedants correcting him before the paint is dry because the
> spelling really doesn't matter.

In the early days of email, when there was very little chance that an
accented letter would survive transmission, I noticed that
Spanish-speaking correspondents would have no qualms about omitting all
the accents, but one think they would never do was to write ñ as n.
They didn't agree how to write it, however: ny (Catalan), ni (I don't
know where that came from), gn (French, Italian), nh (Portuguese) ...


--
athel

[Adam Funk]

On 2015-07-09, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:

> In the early days of email, when there was very little chance that an
> accented letter would survive transmission, I noticed that
> Spanish-speaking correspondents would have no qualms about omitting all
> the accents, but one think they would never do was to write ñ as n.

Oo! Oo! Mr Kotter, I know the answer!

> They didn't agree how to write it, however: ny (Catalan), ni (I don't
> know where that came from), gn (French, Italian), nh (Portuguese) ...

Was there any kind of logical regional preference, e.g.,
Spanish-speakers who lived near Portugal preferred "nh", &c.?


--
...the reason why so many professional artists drink a lot is not
necessarily very much to do with the artistic temperament, etc. It is
simply that they can afford to, because they can normally take a large
part of a day off to deal with the ravages. [Amis _On Drink_]

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

On 2015-07-09 16:23:18 +0200, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> said:

> On 2015-07-09, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
>
>> In the early days of email, when there was very little chance that an
>> accented letter would survive transmission, I noticed that
>> Spanish-speaking correspondents would have no qualms about omitting all
>> the accents, but one think they would never do was to write ñ as n.
>
> Oo! Oo! Mr Kotter, I know the answer!
>
>> They didn't agree how to write it, however: ny (Catalan), ni (I don't
>> know where that came from), gn (French, Italian), nh (Portuguese) ...
>
> Was there any kind of logical regional preference, e.g.,
> Spanish-speakers who lived near Portugal preferred "nh", &c.?

Not that I could detect. Maybe "ny" was preferred by people who knew
Catalan but apart from that I didn't notice any system. Knowledge of
Portuguese or Portugal isn't very prominent among Spanish speakers,
even if they live close to the frontier. I was wondering if they also
have "nh" in Galician, but they don't: they follow Portuguese in using
"lh" rather than "ll", but Castilian in having "ñ".

Something I expected on historical grounds was "nn" for "ñ", but I
never saw that.


--
athel

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

On 2015-07-09 17:44:52 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden <athe...@yahoo.co.uk> said:

> [ ... ]

> I was wondering if they also have "nh" in Galician, but they don't:
> they follow Portuguese in using "lh" rather than "ll", but Castilian in
> having "ñ".

I just had a look at the Wikipedia page about La Coruña in Galician.
Apparently it does have nh, but not as a replacement for ñ. For
example, "Unha das características máis notables que identifican á
Coruña constitúena as múltiples e variadas...". The first word would
certainly be "una" in Castlian, and "uma" in Portuguese. However,
"das", "máis", "as" and "e" are all Portuguese-looking.




--
athel

[Jerry Friedman]

On 7/9/15 8:13 AM, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
...

> In the early days of email, when there was very little chance that an
> accented letter would survive transmission, I noticed that
> Spanish-speaking correspondents would have no qualms about omitting all
> the accents, but one think they would never do was to write ñ as n. They
> didn't agree how to write it, however: ny (Catalan), ni (I don't know
> where that came from),

The closest you can come in Spanish to showing the pronunciation?

> gn (French, Italian), nh (Portuguese) ...

--

Jerry Friedman

[Richard Tobin]

In article <5326e5e0-748a-4e63...@googlegroups.com>,

Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

>> I believe the Jargon File also defines "<" as "bra" and ">" as "ket"....r

>Then what do they call "[" and "]"?

I don't know, but the INTERCAL manual calls them "U turn" and "U turn back".

-- Richard

[Steve Hayes]

On Thu, 9 Jul 2015 04:42:39 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"

So was Google, till we got used to mit.

[Adam Funk]

On 2015-07-09, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:

> On 2015-07-09 16:23:18 +0200, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> said:
>
>> On 2015-07-09, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
>>
>>> In the early days of email, when there was very little chance that an
>>> accented letter would survive transmission, I noticed that
>>> Spanish-speaking correspondents would have no qualms about omitting all
>>> the accents, but one think they would never do was to write ñ as n.
>>
>> Oo! Oo! Mr Kotter, I know the answer!

Are there many big goofs from ñ/n confusion other than the famous
year/anus one?

>>> They didn't agree how to write it, however: ny (Catalan), ni (I don't
>>> know where that came from), gn (French, Italian), nh (Portuguese) ...
>>
>> Was there any kind of logical regional preference, e.g.,
>> Spanish-speakers who lived near Portugal preferred "nh", &c.?
>
> Not that I could detect. Maybe "ny" was preferred by people who knew
> Catalan but apart from that I didn't notice any system. Knowledge of
> Portuguese or Portugal isn't very prominent among Spanish speakers,
> even if they live close to the frontier. I was wondering if they also
> have "nh" in Galician, but they don't: they follow Portuguese in using
> "lh" rather than "ll", but Castilian in having "ñ".
>
> Something I expected on historical grounds was "nn" for "ñ", but I
> never saw that.

Interesting. When you say "historical", do you mean more recently
than Latin, i.e., in something like "Middle Spanish"? (I know very
little about the history of Spanish so I mean by analogy with French.)


--
I thought my life would seem more interesting with a musical
score and a laugh track. --- Calvin

[Adam Funk]

Sounds like a car GPS gone wrong...


--
When a man tells you that he got rich through hard work, ask him
whose? --- Don Marquis

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

My understanding (which may be wrong) is that the tilde ~ written above
an n in Spanish (or above a or o in Portuguese) was originally a letter
n, so año was a way of writing anno. It looks a little like a n written
rapidly by hand..

> (I know very
> little about the history of Spanish so I mean by analogy with French.)


--

athel

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Thursday, July 9, 2015 at 4:38:12 PM UTC-4, Steve Hayes wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Jul 2015 04:42:39 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
> <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> >On Thursday, July 9, 2015 at 1:53:26 AM UTC-4, Steve Hayes wrote:
> >> On Wed, 8 Jul 2015 10:23:18 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
> >> <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >> >On Wednesday, July 8, 2015 at 10:55:16 AM UTC-4, Phil Carmody wrote:

> >> >> Neither here nor in Finland does Firefox's "English, motherfucker,
> >> >> do you serve it?" setting actually work for google search results.
> >> >> This might be because I reject all cookies from the scumbags.
> >> >Then you probably shouldn't complain.
> >> >> Phil, user of DuckDuckGo nowadays.
> >> >I first heard of it from Thom Hartmann. He never explained why anything with
> >> >such a dumb name should be taken seriously.
> >> I've not heard of Thom Hartmann,
> >A leftist radio talk show host formerly heard in NYC.
> >> but I've used DuckDuckGo when Google
> >> can't find what I'm looking for, since DDG is an aggregation of the
> >> results of several search engines. But I prefer Google's display of
> >> the results of a ssearch.
> >It's still a ridiculous name.
>
> So was Google, till we got used to mit.

But "Google" isn't a combination of words or even morphemes that don't make
sense together. It's like "Kodak."

[Will Parsons]

It was a common way of writing an N in mediaeval Latin manuscripts.
It's also the source of the tilde in Portuguese to indicate a
nasalized vowel.

--
Will

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

On Thu, 9 Jul 2015 14:20:42 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"

"Google" was/is a mis-spelling.
http://www.webcitation.org/68ubHzYs7

Origin of the name "Google"

In 1996, Larry Page and Sergey Brin called their initial search
engine "BackRub," named for its analysis of the web's "back links."
Larry's office was in room 360 of the Gates CS Building, which he
shared with several other graduate students, including Sean
Anderson, Tamara Munzner, and Lucas Pereira. In 1997, Larry and his
officemates discussed a number of possible new names for the rapidly
improving search technology. Sean recalls the final brainstorming
session as occurring one day during September of that year.

Sean and Larry were in their office, using the whiteboard, trying to
think up a good name - something that related to the indexing of an
immense amount of data. Sean verbally suggested the word
"googolplex," and Larry responded verbally with the shortened form,
"googol" (both words refer to specific large numbers). Sean was
seated at his computer terminal, so he executed a search of the
Internet domain name registry database to see if the newly suggested
name was still available for registration and use. Sean is not an
infallible speller, and he made the mistake of searching for the
name spelled as "google.com," which he found to be available. Larry
liked the name, and within hours he took the step of registering the
name "google.com" for himself and Sergey (the domain name
registration record dates from September 15, 1997).

--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)

[R H Draney]

"Peter Duncanson [BrE]" <ma...@peterduncanson.net> wrote in
news:bfutpad00rdn1b5s4...@4ax.com:

> On Thu, 9 Jul 2015 14:20:42 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
> <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>>On Thursday, July 9, 2015 at 4:38:12 PM UTC-4, Steve Hayes wrote:
>>> On Thu, 9 Jul 2015 04:42:39 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
>>> <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> >On Thursday, July 9, 2015 at 1:53:26 AM UTC-4, Steve Hayes wrote:
>>> >> On Wed, 8 Jul 2015 10:23:18 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
>>> >> <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>> >> >On Wednesday, July 8, 2015 at 10:55:16 AM UTC-4, Phil Carmody
>>> >> >wrote:

>>> >> >> Phil, user of DuckDuckGo nowadays.
>>> >> >I first heard of it from Thom Hartmann. He never explained why
>>> >> >anything with such a dumb name should be taken seriously.
>>> >> I've not heard of Thom Hartmann,
>>> >A leftist radio talk show host formerly heard in NYC.
>>> >> but I've used DuckDuckGo when Google
>>> >> can't find what I'm looking for, since DDG is an aggregation of
>>> >> the results of several search engines. But I prefer Google's
>>> >> display of the results of a ssearch.
>>> >It's still a ridiculous name.
>>>
>>> So was Google, till we got used to mit.
>>
>>But "Google" isn't a combination of words or even morphemes that don't
>>make sense together. It's like "Kodak."
>
> "Google" was/is a mis-spelling.

And "DuckDuckGo" derives from the children's game of "duck, duck,
goose"...company founder Gabriel Weinberg claims he just liked the sound
and it doesn't have any metaphorical meaning, but it could be argued
that a search engine looks at a series of candidate entries and rejects
each until it finds one that works, like a child repeatedly tagging
"duck" until he hits on the selected "goose"....r

[Jerry Friedman]

On 7/9/15 3:32 PM, Lewis wrote:
> In message <d07dt4...@mid.individual.net>

> Right, and that dictionary would be the officially correct Spanish which
> is not reflective of the Spanish that people actually use.

In fact, here's a page with examples of "el tamale" and "un tamale".
¡Qué horrores!

>>> For example, my Spanish (albeit poor) is considered very stilted and
>>> old fashioned in Mexico where the polite Ud form is nearly as dead as
>>> the Vos. form has been for over a century.
>
>> Ud. in all its forms, or just in the singular?
>

> Well, just in the singular, of course. There is no Vos. in Mexican
> Spanish, so the only plural 'you' possible is Uds.

>
>> Uds. is alive and well
>> in Chile as (effectively) the plural of tu, but in the singular it
>> would, as you say, be regarded as stilted.
>

> I think Columbia still used Vos (or at least 30 years ago),

In Colombia, from what I've read, "tu" has disappeared and everyone uses
"usted" for everything (though some older people use "su merced", which
you'd think would be even more formal, with family members).

> but most
> Central and South American countries had eliminated it.

I'm pretty sure it's alive and well in Argentina and Uruguay. Here are
the lyrics to "Vos no tenés un buen look".

http://www.rock.com.ar/letras/12/12751.shtml

(For some reason, it also has "tu" forms such as "quieres".)

Here's one from Costa Rica:

http://www.ulatina.ac.cr/

Note "escogé instead of "escoge" and "matriculate" instead of
"matricúlate". This page has an actual "vos" under 8:

http://www.ulatina.ac.cr/conoce-la-u/vida-estudiantil/oficina-internacional

>> In the early days of email, when there was very little chance that an
>> accented letter would survive transmission, I noticed that
>> Spanish-speaking correspondents would have no qualms about omitting all
>> the accents, but one think they would never do was to write ñ as n.
>> They didn't agree how to write it, however: ny (Catalan), ni (I don't
>> know where that came from), gn (French, Italian), nh (Portuguese) ...
>

> n~ is what I remember unless it was a word that was in English also, in
> which case the English spelling would be used (canyon, etc).

Ah yes, I've seen that one, and just ~ as in "se~or".

> Lack of accents often makes things confusing, but then again with verbs
> the non-present tenses are used so little... It's not uncommon to hear
> "I go to the library tomorrow."
>


--
Jerry Friedman

[Tony Cooper]

The first search engine I started using was "Dogpile". I see that
Dogpile is still around, but I haven't used it since Google appeared
on the scene.



--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

[Peter Moylan]

On 10/07/15 06:44, Steve Hayes wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Jul 2015 04:42:39 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
> <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>> On Thursday, July 9, 2015 at 1:53:26 AM UTC-4, Steve Hayes wrote:

>>> but I've used DuckDuckGo when Google
>>> can't find what I'm looking for, since DDG is an aggregation of the
>>> results of several search engines. But I prefer Google's display of
>>> the results of a ssearch.
>>
>> It's still a ridiculous name.
>
> So was Google, till we got used to mit.

I have to admit that I never remember about DuckDuckGo because I confuse
it with GoDogGo.

A quick search gives me the impression that DDG is biased towards US
sites, and keeps showing LinkedIn as a search result when that would
appear not to be relevant. Still, I suspect that Google has an even
stronger bias towards companies that pay it for special treatment.

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

On 10 Jul 2015 02:52:16 GMT, R H Draney <dado...@spamcop.net> wrote:

I, a Brit, have never heard of the children's game of "duck, duck,

goose"

>...company founder Gabriel Weinberg claims he just liked the sound
>and it doesn't have any metaphorical meaning, but it could be argued
>that a search engine looks at a series of candidate entries and rejects
>each until it finds one that works, like a child repeatedly tagging
>"duck" until he hits on the selected "goose"....r

An important point about the word "Google" is that it looks like a verb,
sounds like an verb and is used as a verb. When used as a verb
"everyone" one knows what is meant.

"DuckDuckGo" is not conveniently usable as a verb. Also, it doesn't
easily "flow off the tongue".

And:

Google > Googled

DuckDuckGo > DuckDuckWent ?

[Adam Funk]

On 2015-07-10, Tony Cooper wrote:

> The first search engine I started using was "Dogpile". I see that
> Dogpile is still around, but I haven't used it since Google appeared
> on the scene.

Were the results the dog's breakfast, the dog's bollocks, or a pile of
doggy doo?

[Adam Funk]

OK, a bit like the superscript "e" that was superseded by two dots in
German.

> It was a common way of writing an N in mediaeval Latin manuscripts.
> It's also the source of the tilde in Portuguese to indicate a
> nasalized vowel.

Oh, I remember that now --- commonly used over vowels (in Med. Latin)
as well.


--
A firm rule must be imposed upon our nation before it destroys
itself. The United States needs some theology and geometry, some taste
and decency. I suspect that we are teetering on the edge of the abyss.
--- Ignatius J Reilly

[R H Draney]

Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote in news:k0k47cx531.ln2
@news.ducksburg.com:

> On 2015-07-10, Tony Cooper wrote:
>
>> The first search engine I started using was "Dogpile". I see that
>> Dogpile is still around, but I haven't used it since Google appeared
>> on the scene.
>
> Were the results the dog's breakfast, the dog's bollocks, or a pile of
> doggy doo?

Depends what you asked it to fetch....r

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Friday, July 10, 2015 at 6:28:49 AM UTC-4, PeterWD wrote:
> On 10 Jul 2015 02:52:16 GMT, R H Draney <dado...@spamcop.net> wrote:

> >And "DuckDuckGo" derives from the children's game of "duck, duck,
> >goose"
>
> I, a Brit, have never heard of the children's game of "duck, duck,
> goose"

Nor I, an American. Maybe it was a California thing?

[Adam Funk]

It must vary regionally; we played it in school in Virginia.


--
With the breakdown of the medieval system, the gods of chaos, lunacy,
and bad taste gained ascendancy.
--- Ignatius J Reilly

[Will Parsons]

On Friday, 10 Jul 2015 6:38 AM -0400, Adam Funk wrote:
> On 2015-07-09, Will Parsons wrote:
>
>> On Thursday, 9 Jul 2015 5:06 PM -0400, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
>>> On 2015-07-09 20:36:05 +0000, Adam Funk said:
>>>> On 2015-07-09, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
>
>>>>> Something I expected on historical grounds was "nn" for "ñ", but I
>>>>> never saw that.
>>>>
>>>> Interesting. When you say "historical", do you mean more recently
>>>> than Latin, i.e., in something like "Middle Spanish"?
>>>
>>> My understanding (which may be wrong) is that the tilde ~ written above
>>> an n in Spanish (or above a or o in Portuguese) was originally a letter
>>> n, so año was a way of writing anno. It looks a little like a n written
>>> rapidly by hand..
>
> OK, a bit like the superscript "e" that was superseded by two dots in
> German.

Yes, same principle.

>> It was a common way of writing an N in mediaeval Latin manuscripts.
>> It's also the source of the tilde in Portuguese to indicate a
>> nasalized vowel.
>
> Oh, I remember that now --- commonly used over vowels (in Med. Latin)
> as well.

Yes - it was more commonly used over vowels. It could also be used
for an M, e.g., "partẽ" for "partem". It helped save space.

--
Will