Re: in collaboration with
Roland Hutchinson
> On Mon, 11 Aug 2008 18:05:23 -0400, Roland Hutchinson
> <my.sp...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>>ceteris paribus (=all other things being equal): a bit obscure,
>
> I wonder if it would be more accurate to say "ceteris paribus" means
> "other things being equal" and not necessarily "all other things".
It would certainly be more literal. I think the English version usually
includes the "all" -- very little if any difference in meaning whether it's
there or not, I would judge.
> "Ceteris paribus" will always be associated in my mind with _Lasker's
> Manual of Chess_, by Emanuel Lasker. He used it quite a few times in
> that book, and that may be the only place I've encountered it until
> now.
Interesting. I think I first encountered it in some mathematical treatise
or other: maybe logic or model theory or something along those lines. It's
not something I bump into often, for sure.
--
Roland Hutchinson Will play viola da gamba for food.
NB mail to my.spamtrap [at] verizon.net is heavily filtered to
remove spam. If your message looks like spam I may not see it.
Garrett Wollman
Roland Hutchinson <my.sp...@verizon.net> wrote:
[ceteris paribus]
>Interesting. I think I first encountered it in some mathematical treatise
>or other: maybe logic or model theory or something along those lines. It's
>not something I bump into often, for sure.
Yet I don't think I've ever seen it abbreviated "c.p." in an English
text. (Likewise I've never seen "mutatis mutandis", a favorite of
lawyers everywhere, abbreviated.)
Apropos the original subject, is it time once again to start flaming
the German-L1 ESL teachers who teach their students to translate
"bzw." as "resp."?
-GAWollman
--
Garrett A. Wollman | The real tragedy of human existence is not that we are
wol...@csail.mit.edu| nasty by nature, but that a cruel structural asymmetry
Opinions not those | grants to rare events of meanness such power to shape
of MIT or CSAIL. | our history. - S.J. Gould, Ten Thousand Acts of Kindness
Fred Springer
> Bob Cunningham wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 11 Aug 2008 18:05:23 -0400, Roland Hutchinson
>> <my.sp...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> ceteris paribus (=all other things being equal): a bit obscure,
>> I wonder if it would be more accurate to say "ceteris paribus" means
>> "other things being equal" and not necessarily "all other things".
>
> It would certainly be more literal. I think the English version usually
> includes the "all" -- very little if any difference in meaning whether it's
> there or not, I would judge.
>
>> "Ceteris paribus" will always be associated in my mind with _Lasker's
>> Manual of Chess_, by Emanuel Lasker. He used it quite a few times in
>> that book, and that may be the only place I've encountered it until
>> now.
>
> Interesting. I think I first encountered it in some mathematical treatise
> or other: maybe logic or model theory or something along those lines. It's
> not something I bump into often, for sure.
>
The phrase occurs rather a lot in economic theory, where relationships
between two variables are investigated on the assumption that other
variables in the system remain constant.
One of the frustrations -- and charms -- of studying economics is that
in practice ceteris never are paribus, rendering fruitless most attempts
to validate theory by reference to the real world.
Maria C.
> When I'm making notes while debugging a computer program, I find it
> helpful to have an abbreviation for "should be", so I write "sb".
> I'm sure I'm not the only person who's invented that one for that
> purpose, but I've never seen anyone else use it.
I've used "sb" (or "s/b") for the past 40-some years to mean "should
be."*
Also: "wb" or "w/b" for "would be" or "will be," depending on context;
"r" for "are"; a dot (positioned where an apostrophe would be) for
"ing"; and many other abbreviations wc I cnt rem now.
If I still have the book, I'll look up some more.
--
Maria C.
High School Graduating Class of 1961
John Kane
wrote:
> Bob Cunningham wrote:
> > On Mon, 11 Aug 2008 18:05:23 -0400, Roland Hutchinson
>
> > [...]
>
> >>ceteris paribus (=all other things being equal): a bit obscure,
>
> > I wonder if it would be more accurate to say "ceteris paribus" means
> > "other things being equal" and not necessarily "all other things".
>
> It would certainly be more literal. I think the English version usually
> includes the "all" -- very little if any difference in meaning whether it's
> there or not, I would judge.
My guess would be that it originallly would have been omnibus certeris
parabus and the omnibus got dropped.
John Kane Kingston ON Canada
John Kane
> In article <g7r32n$vu...@registered.motzarella.org>,
> Roland Hutchinson <my.spamt...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> [ceteris paribus]
>
> >Interesting. I think I first encountered it in some mathematical treatise
> >or other: maybe logic or model theory or something along those lines. It's
> >not something I bump into often, for sure.
>
> Yet I don't think I've ever seen it abbreviated "c.p." in an English
> text. (Likewise I've never seen "mutatis mutandis", a favorite of
> lawyers everywhere, abbreviated.)
>
> Apropos the original subject, is it time once again to start flaming
> the German-L1 ESL teachers who teach their students to translate
> "bzw." as "resp."?
It might be but what does 'resp." mean?
John Kane
It will never replace Pitman
HVS
[thinks...there has to be a line in here about Routemasters and the
non-paribus bendibus...)
--
Cheers, Harvey
CanEng and BrEng, indiscriminately mixed
Garrett Wollman
Thank you for stepping forward as Exhibit A.
Near as I can tell, it means "whatever a German thinks 'bzw.' means".
Bob Cunningham
In your economics experience, how is "ceteris paribus" pronounced?
I would like to pronounce it "SET@r@s PER@b@s", following the
precedent of "et cetera", but the _New Shorter Oxford_ lists
"KATE@ris" in first place, followed by "set-", then "seet-".
My favorite American dictionary, the _Webster's New World College
Dictionary_, which is also said to be the primary dictionary for the
Associated Press and many newspapers, shows only the pronunciation I
like, "set-".
The online _Merriam Webster's_ (m-w.com) has the "Kate" pronunciation
first, followed by "ket", then "set".
Let me hasten to say that I realize the order of showing
pronunciations in dictionaries doesn't necessarily imply frequency of
use or usage preference.
--
Woody Wordpecker
Greater Los Angeles, California
USA
angelgl...@yahoo.com
I suppose we all have individual abbreviations (Boswell had his; Pound
had his). Since "the" is very common, I decided years ago to invent an
abbreviated form; now since 'em is common for "them" by analogy I hit
upon "e" as a replacement for "the" (another analogy was with "a," te
other common article; since "a" was already taken, I therefore used the
next available vowel); I've been using that snce my college days. It's
very easy to write in the single stroke loop form I use, with an eye in
the middle of a rope.)
So a sentence would look like this: "It's true tht e main point of e
transaction was tht he cd find somethg to do w e investment." (I used to
use w/ for with but then simplified it with just a w, as b represents
"but." I used to use "shd" for "should" but soon simplified that with
"sd" and "wd" for "would."
Then there are abbreviations that depend on context and change with
context. Obviously if one is taking notes on a film the first iniitial
will do; if on Bible literature, I use "x" for Jesus (I once observed a
classmate taking notes using the cross symbol for Jesus' name). Other
common abbrev. I use are fr. for from; v for "very"; and w for either
with or will depending on context.
Nick
> (I used to
> use w/ for with but then simplified it with just a w, as b represents
> "but."
I use the medical c-bar and s-bar for "with" and "without".
Every few years I forget and use them in a note for someone and confuse
them.
R H Draney
>
>One of the frustrations -- and charms -- of studying economics is that
>in practice ceteris never are paribus, rendering fruitless most attempts
>to validate theory by reference to the real world.
As is often observed in my line of work, in a multitasking shop, you can never
do anything again...you can, if you're lucky, do something similar....r
--
Evelyn Wood just looks at the pictures.
Leslie Danks
> In article
> <ea2e9ab6-c917-460d...@f36g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>,
> John Kane <jrkr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>On Aug 12, 1:05 am, woll...@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) wrote:
>>> Apropos the original subject, is it time once again to start flaming
>>> the German-L1 ESL teachers who teach their students to translate
>>> "bzw." as "resp."?
>>
>>It might be but what does 'resp." mean?
>
I am very fond of H.W. Fowler's article on "respectively" [1]:
"respective(ly). Delight in these words is widespread but depraved. Like
soldiers and policemen, they have work to do, but, when the work is not
there, the less we see of them the better; of ten sentences in which they
occur, nine would be improved by their removal. The evil is widespread
enough to justify an examination at some length. Examples may be sorted
into six groups: A, in which the words give information needed by
sensible readers; B, in which they give information that may be needed by
fools; C, in which they say again what is said elsewhere; D, in which
they say nothing intelligible; E, in which they are used wrongly for some
other word; and F, in which they give a positively wrong sense."
He then goes on to present and discuss examples of the above.
> Thank you for stepping forward as Exhibit A.
>
> Near as I can tell, it means "whatever a German thinks 'bzw.' means".
Often, this is the case -- or "whatever a (writer of) German wants it to
mean". "Bzw." (beziehungsweise) can sometimes be translated
as "respectively" in sense A above. Frequently, it makes more sense to
translate it as "and" or "or"; occasionally "but" is appropriate, and
leaving it out altogether is often better than any of these alternatives.
The Germans, thorough as they are, have also come up with Case G, which
means: "I have a series of values for a series of parameters which are
inter-related in various ways. I am too idle (or challenged) to summarise
these relationships clearly for the benefit of my readers; I shall simply
throw them into a sentence and place "bzw." somewhere in the middle.
Anyone smart enough to be reading my publications will surely be able to
figure things out for themselves."
Often, the best way to translate a Case G sentence is to distill out the
meaning and rewrite it from scratch.
[1] A dictionary of Modern English Usage by H.W. Fowler, Second Edition
revised by Sir Ernest Gowers, p.521 (ISBN 0-19-281389-7)
--
Les
Exhibit B
R H Draney
I used to confuse scorekeepers at the bowling alley by announcing the number of
pins down in ASL...every time I knocked down six, they'd record it as
"three"....r
Default User
> Mark Brader wrote, in part:
>
> > When I'm making notes while debugging a computer program, I find it
> > helpful to have an abbreviation for "should be", so I write "sb".
> > I'm sure I'm not the only person who's invented that one for that
> > purpose, but I've never seen anyone else use it.
>
> I've used "sb" (or "s/b") for the past 40-some years to mean "should
> be."*
We used to use the second form in writing anomaly reports back when I
was test engineer. That was a move to conserve space on the forms. I
have never used it anywhere else.
Brian
--
If televison's a babysitter, the Internet is a drunk librarian who
won't shut up.
-- Dorothy Gambrell (http://catandgirl.com)
CDB
>>> [...]
I think the trick is that Latin "doesn't have a definite article",
which is to say that a bare noun (say "carta") is used to mean what we
would mean by the noun either with the article or without it,
depending on context.
"Ceteris paribus" can be translated as "*the* other things being
equal", which implies "all", sorta: (all) the ones we're talking
about. No omnibus required to get there.
That gap is what causes all the fuss about "the Magna Carta" too, in a
way. People know that there isn't any definite article in the
original phrase, and conclude that there shouldn't be one in the
English use of it either. But Latin doesn't so much lack the notion
conveyed by a definite article as fail to make it explicit*: it's
perfectly legitimate IMO to add a disambiguating "the" in English.
* To kick Whorf when he's down
CDB
[personal shorthands]
> [methodology]
> So a sentence would look like this: "It's true tht e main point of e
> transaction was tht he cd find somethg to do w e investment." [...]
Hm. WIWAL, "main pt f tsactn ws: cd find sth do w nvstmt."
> Then there are abbreviations that depend on context and change with
> context. Obviously if one is taking notes on a film the first
> iniitial will do; if on Bible literature, I use "x" for Jesus (I
> once observed a classmate taking notes using the cross symbol for
> Jesus' name). Other common abbrev. I use are fr. for from; v for
> "very"; and w for either with or will depending on context.
Better to use X for Christ, since that's what it stands for. J-X: not
only a Muslim but a Black one, by X.
Maria C.
> Maria C. wrote:
>> Mark Brader wrote, in part:
>>
>>> When I'm making notes while debugging a computer program, I find it
>>> helpful to have an abbreviation for "should be", so I write "sb".
>>> I'm sure I'm not the only person who's invented that one for that
>>> purpose, but I've never seen anyone else use it.
>>
>> I've used "sb" (or "s/b") for the past 40-some years to mean "should
>> be."* Also: "wb" or "w/b" for "would be" or "will be," depending on
>> context; "r" for "are"; a dot (positioned where an apostrophe would
>> be) for "ing"; and many other abbreviations wc I cnt rem now.
>>
>> If I still have the book, I'll look up some more.
>
Actually, I didn't make those up. In editing my post, I left out the
source: a course called "Stenoscript" which I took in an evening Adult
Education class (one 45-minute class per week for a few weeks) after
finishing high school.
--
Maria C.
the Omrud
> In article <ea2e9ab6-c917-460d...@f36g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>,
> John Kane <jrkr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Aug 12, 1:05 am, woll...@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) wrote:
>>> Apropos the original subject, is it time once again to start flaming
>>> the German-L1 ESL teachers who teach their students to translate
>>> "bzw." as "resp."?
>> It might be but what does 'resp." mean?
>
> Thank you for stepping forward as Exhibit A.
>
> Near as I can tell, it means "whatever a German thinks 'bzw.' means".
<German Officer>
By Zee Vay.
</outrageous stereotype>
--
David
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
But not apparently a WW1 German officer.
OED:
b. A preconceived and oversimplified idea of the
characteristics which typify a person, situation, etc.;
an attitude based on such a preconception. Also, a
person who appears to conform closely to the idea of a
type.
1922 W. LIPPMAN Public Opinion vi. 93 A stereotype may be so
consistently and authoritatively transmitted in each
generation from parent to child that it seems almost like a
biological fact.
1935 G. W. ALLPORT in C. Murchison Handbk. Social Psychol.
xvii. 809 Attitudes which result in gross
oversimplifications of experience and in prejudgements...are
commonly called biases, prejudices, or stereotypes.
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
Fred Springer
dismal science were a long time ago, and it may be that the "kayteris"
pronunciation is more general now. It's certainly what's given in the
Cassell Dictionary of Foreign Words & Phrases", with no alternative
pronunciation offered.
I have always been very wary of the pronunciation of Latin phrases that
have become well-established in English, because I was taught the
so-called "scientific" pronunciation of the language at school, which
purported to be (approximately) the way it had been pronounced by the
Romans. For example, we didn't pronounce Caesar as "seize 'er", but
"kyzaar". "Kayteris" follows the scientific principle, whereas "seteris"
is almost certainly what the 17th century coiners of the phrase would
have said.
Even today, saying "prima facie" in the scientific way to an English
lawyer will make him roar with laughter. He says "primmer fayshee"
whereas I'd been taught to say "preemah fakeeay". AP Herbert had a lot
of fun with that in one of his court-room stories. Anyone remember them?
"Misleading Cases in Uncommon Law" was the title of one collection of them.
Roland Hutchinson
There are ways around the lack of definite articles when one is desperately
wanted, such as deputizing a demonstrative to serve in its place, as
in "Winnie ille Pu", Winnie _the_ Pooh. (A more classical example would
be "Alexander ille magnus", Alexander _ther_ Great). And of course that is
precisely where the articles in romance languages came from.
> * To kick Whorf when he's down
--
Roland Hutchinson
Then there's the sort of case A where the German mode of putting the words
in order produces something that is almost, but not quite, entirely unlike
English: "The boys (resp. girls) will line up on the north (resp. south)
side of the playing field."
Chuck Riggs
wrote:
A danger of using too many abbreviations is that you won't remember
what they all mean when you review your notes.
A newspaper article or report can take longer to read, in my
experience, when the writer goes overboard with acronyms and
abbreviations, for the reader has to go back to the beginning of the
article to find out what the author is referring to.
Therefore, abbreviations and many acronyms suck, in my opinion.
--
Regards,
Chuck Riggs
Near Dublin, Ireland
Chuck Riggs
wrote:
>angelgloww2000 wrote, in part:
Did it teach a particular version of stenography, or are there several
versions? Can one stenographer generally read another one's work?
angelgl...@yahoo.com
Certainly you're entitled to your opinion; but I've NEVER had any
problems, not only with my abbreviations but my OTU (out of this
universe) squiggly scrawl. Don't ask me how, but even years later I can,
based on context, figure out what I wrote. But abbreviations are another
matter not involving legibility. Why should one have problems if one's
consistent? When I see b I know it's but; if I see cd I know it's could;
if I see w I know, based on context, it's with or will ("I w go to e
library w my laptop next Friday"). I've used such abbreviations for many
years now w/o problems; neither of course do I have problems with nonce
or ad hoc abbreviations, depending on a particular focus, whether a
film, special topic, etc. Obviously if I'm writing on Batman, I know
what B stands for! But each to their own. Oddly, when I type I never use
abbreviations, though it would be very easy to make global changes
later. I'm a sufficiently fast typist that somehow typing "could" and
not thinking about it is fater than typing "cd" and thinking about it!
Amethyst Deceiver
usenet...@gEXPUNGEmail.com says...
Your name vill also go on ze list.
--
Linz
Wet Yorks via Cambridge, York, London and Watford
My accent may vary
the Omrud
Now I've got Colonel Bogey STS.
--
David
Amethyst Deceiver
usenet...@gEXPUNGEmail.com says...
I've had a fortnight of "Who do you think you are kidding..." following
the Dads' Army anniversary on the Beeb, so it's only fair to share.
"Mr Brown goes off to town on the 8.21" - either he started work at 9.30
or he didn't have far to go!
Pat Durkin
"the Omrud" <usenet...@gEXPUNGEmail.com> wrote in message
news:SXzok.41895$E41....@text.news.virginmedia.com...
Colonel Klink, hier.
(But I associate the Colonel Bogey March with the Kwai bridge film.
Japanese, rather than German. Or is it just WWII in general?"
Leslie Danks
[...]
> (But I associate the Colonel Bogey March with the Kwai bridge film.
> Japanese, rather than German. Or is it just WWII in general?"
Some of the words set to it (which I learned at school) certainly had a
German connection:
Hitler, has only got one ball,
Rommel, has two but very small,
Himmler, is very sim'lar,
And poor old Goebbels,
Has no balls,
At all.
And there's even a cross-thread in there.
--
Les (BrE)
Donna Richoux
> (But I associate the Colonel Bogey March with the Kwai bridge film.
> Japanese, rather than German. Or is it just WWII in general?"
"Colonel Bogey's March" was written in 1914 and was very well known by
WWII, so it could have been whistled or played by anybody. Or sung with
the various sets if comic words, some of which mention Hitler and
Goebbels.
This article has some of the basics:
http://www.mvdaily.com/articles/1999/04/bogey.htm
--
Best -- Donna Richoux
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
<dur...@sbc.com> wrote:
>(But I associate the Colonel Bogey March with the Kwai bridge film.
>Japanese, rather than German. Or is it just WWII in general?"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonel_Bogey_March
The "Colonel Bogey March" is a popular march that was
written in 1914 by Lieutenant F. J. Ricketts (1881-1945), a
British military bandmaster who was director of music for
the Royal Marines at Plymouth. Since at that time service
personnel were not encouraged to have professional lives
outside the armed forces, Ricketts published "Colonel Bogey"
and his other compositions under the pseudonym Kenneth
Alford. Supposedly, the tune was inspired by a military man
and golfer who whistled a characteristic two-note phrase (a
descending minor third interval) instead of shouting
"Fore!". It is this phrase that begins each line of the
melody. Bogey is a golfing term meaning one over par.
The sheet music was a million-seller, and the march was
recorded many times. "Colonel Bogey" is the authorized march
of The King's Own Calgary Regiment (RCAC) of the Canadian
Forces. Many humorous or satirical verses have been sung to
this tune; some of them vulgar. The English quickly
established a simple insulting use for the tune, where the
first two syllables were used for a variety of rude
expressions, most commonly "Bollocks", then followed by
"...and the same to you." The best known, which originated
in England at the outset of World War II, goes by the title
"Hitler Has Only Got One Ball". A later parody, sung by
schoolchildren in the United States, is called "Comet", and
deals with the effects of consuming a popular brand of
household cleanser.
....
....
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
<dur...@sbc.com> wrote:
Re: the Colonel Bogey March
I think I posted a few years ago that I was told by a cinema
projectionist in London that it was customary to have a standard
tune that would be played in the event of an emergency requiring
the ushers to ush the customers out of the cinema in a rapid but
orderly way. The alternative of sounding the fire alarm was
considered unwise because of the danger of panic.
The man told me that there was one cinema that had adopted
Colonel Bogey as its emergency tune. There was apparently
confusion and chaos among the employees the first time that the
Bridge on the River Kwai was shown in that cinema.
the Omrud
> On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 07:52:03 -0500, "Pat Durkin"
> <dur...@sbc.com> wrote:
>
> Re: the Colonel Bogey March
>
> I think I posted a few years ago that I was told by a cinema
> projectionist in London that it was customary to have a standard
> tune that would be played in the event of an emergency requiring
> the ushers to ush the customers out of the cinema in a rapid but
> orderly way. The alternative of sounding the fire alarm was
> considered unwise because of the danger of panic.
Three Blind Mice in the Odeon in Manchester, at least in the 70s. I
wonder if that's in any movies.
--
David
the Omrud
> In article <SXzok.41895$E41....@text.news.virginmedia.com>,
> usenet...@gEXPUNGEmail.com says...
>> Amethyst Deceiver wrote:
>>> In article <b%nok.41717$E41....@text.news.virginmedia.com>,
>>> usenet...@gEXPUNGEmail.com says...
>>>> Garrett Wollman wrote:
>>>>> In article <ea2e9ab6-c917-460d...@f36g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>,
>>>>> John Kane <jrkr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Aug 12, 1:05 am, woll...@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) wrote:
>>>>>>> Apropos the original subject, is it time once again to start flaming
>>>>>>> the German-L1 ESL teachers who teach their students to translate
>>>>>>> "bzw." as "resp."?
>>>>>> It might be but what does 'resp." mean?
>>>>> Thank you for stepping forward as Exhibit A.
>>>>>
>>>>> Near as I can tell, it means "whatever a German thinks 'bzw.' means".
>>>> <German Officer>
>>>>
>>>> By Zee Vay.
>>>>
>>>> </outrageous stereotype>
>>> Your name vill also go on ze list.
>> Now I've got Colonel Bogey STS.
>
> I've had a fortnight of "Who do you think you are kidding..." following
> the Dads' Army anniversary on the Beeb, so it's only fair to share.
I missed that - no telly in our barn in France. Hissy Radio 4 on LW was
the total electronic entertainment.
> "Mr Brown goes off to town on the 8.21" - either he started work at 9.30
> or he didn't have far to go!
I would imagine that people didn't travel far to work in 1939.
--
David
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
Many of them did in the London area. All those railway lines
were there for a purpose.
Anyway, we are considering the words of a song. "Eight twenty
one" has the right number of syllables and suitable stress
pattern.
Am I alone in thinking that in BrE "the 8.21" would normally be
understood as referring to a train rather than to a bus?
Fred Springer
> Pat Durkin wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>> (But I associate the Colonel Bogey March with the Kwai bridge film.
>> Japanese, rather than German. Or is it just WWII in general?"
>
> Some of the words set to it (which I learned at school) certainly had a
> German connection:
>
> Hitler, has only got one ball,
> Rommel, has two but very small,
Goering, surely?
> Himmler, is very sim'lar,
> And poor old Goebbels,
> Has no balls,
> At all.
>
It has a very plausible ring to it, except for the bit about Goebbels,
who by all accounts was as randy as a billy goat.
R H Draney
I invite you all to join me in remembering this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GazlqD4mLvw
Amethyst Deceiver
ma...@peterduncanson.net says...
No, you are not alone. I've always thought Mr Brown got the train.
Amethyst Deceiver
> Amethyst Deceiver wrote:
> > I've had a fortnight of "Who do you think you are kidding..." following
> > the Dads' Army anniversary on the Beeb, so it's only fair to share.
>
> I missed that - no telly in our barn in France. Hissy Radio 4 on LW was
> the total electronic entertainment.
I'm sure it will be repeated. It was marvellous.
Leslie Danks
> Leslie Danks wrote:
>> Pat Durkin wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> (But I associate the Colonel Bogey March with the Kwai bridge film.
>>> Japanese, rather than German. Or is it just WWII in general?"
>>
>> Some of the words set to it (which I learned at school) certainly had a
>> German connection:
>>
>> Hitler, has only got one ball,
>> Rommel, has two but very small,
>
> Goering, surely?
Could be - it was a long time ago. OTOH, it wouldn't be that surprising if
there were more than one version of a thing like that.
>> Himmler, is very sim'lar,
>> And poor old Goebbels,
>> Has no balls,
>> At all.
>>
> It has a very plausible ring to it, except for the bit about Goebbels,
> who by all accounts was as randy as a billy goat.
In any case, the Hitlerian singularity is supposed to be an established
fact.
--
Les
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
CDB
> CDB wrote:
[Latin doesn't have a definite article]
>> That gap is what causes all the fuss about "the Magna Carta" too,
>> in a way. People know that there isn't any definite article in the
>> original phrase, and conclude that there shouldn't be one in the
>> English use of it either. But Latin doesn't so much lack the
>> notion conveyed by a definite article as fail to make it
>> explicit*: it's perfectly legitimate IMO to add a disambiguating
>> "the" in English.
> There are ways around the lack of definite articles when one is
> desperately wanted, such as deputizing a demonstrative to serve in
> its place, as
> in "Winnie ille Pu", Winnie _the_ Pooh. (A more classical example
> would be "Alexander ille magnus", Alexander _ther_ Great). And of
> course that is precisely where the articles in romance languages
> came from.
I take your point, although, if I had come across the phrase cold, I
might have translated it "Alexander, that great man".
[and Nana sang about ho Megalexandros]
the Omrud
Half an hour for travelling and 10 mins to stroll to the office sounds
quite far even in London in the 30s.
> Anyway, we are considering the words of a song. "Eight twenty
> one" has the right number of syllables and suitable stress
> pattern.
>
> Am I alone in thinking that in BrE "the 8.21" would normally be
> understood as referring to a train rather than to a bus?
You are not alone.
--
David
the Omrud
A great talent, not always properly recognised. He was also a fine
actor, unlike Peter Cook (who was a genius in other ways).
--
David
John Kane
I'm not sure about Stenoscript but most of the alphabet shorthands
look to be rather specific to the writer and the specific topic as
some of the abreviations seem to be context dependent. Pitman or
Gregg short hand should be readable by anyone (at least in theory.
John Kane Kingston ON Canada
Maria C.
> Maria C. wrote:
>> angelgloww2000 wrote, in part:
>>> Maria C. wrote:
>>>> Mark Brader wrote, in part:
>>>>
>>>>> When I'm making notes while debugging a computer program, I find
>>>>> it helpful to have an abbreviation for "should be", so I write
>>>>> "sb". I'm sure I'm not the only person who's invented that one
>>>>> for that purpose, but I've never seen anyone else use it.
>>>>
>>>> I've used "sb" (or "s/b") for the past 40-some years to mean
>>>> "should be."* Also: "wb" or "w/b" for "would be" or "will be,"
>>>> depending on context; "r" for "are"; a dot (positioned where an
>>>> apostrophe would be) for "ing"; and many other abbreviations wc I
>>>> cnt rem now.
>>>>
>>>> If I still have the book, I'll look up some more.
>>>
>>> I suppose we all have individual abbreviations [...]
>>
>> Actually, I didn't make those up. In editing my post, I left out the
>> source: a course called "Stenoscript" which I took in an evening
>> Adult Education class (one 45-minute class per week for a few weeks)
>> after finishing high school.
>
> Did it teach a particular version of stenography,
Yes. "Stenoscript."
> ...or are there several versions?
My guess is yes, but that's just a guess.
> ...Can one stenographer generally read another one's work?
Maybe, but probably only partially. Context would be very important, I
should think, as a person's shorthand symbols vary (in appearance) just
as handwriting does.
I did see "Secretary A" ask "Secretary B" for help in deciphering her
(SecA's) own notes once. Gradually, several people got involved in the
exercise. When someone suggested a reasonable interpretation*, SecA
decided to go with it, knowing that the boss (a very nice guy) would
suggest a change, if need be, before signing the typed letter.
I never heard any more about it, so I imagine the reasonable
interpretation was either right on or close enough.
*Several interpretations were offered, some of which were quite funny --
and totally improbable.
--
Maria C.
John Kane
<isabelle.cecch...@wanadoo.fr.invalid> wrote:
> John Kane a écrit :
>
> > On Aug 10, 6:52 pm, woll...@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) wrote:
>
> >> Sherlock Holmes makes a snarky comment about one of his
> >> police-detective clients: "Un sot peut toujours trouver un plus sot
> >> qui l'admire.")
>
> > I thought I'd read most of Doyle but I don't remember that one. What
> > story is it in?
>
> It's in /A Study in Scarlet/, with a slightly different wording:
> 'Un sot trouve toujours un plus sot qui l'admire.'http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/A_Study_in_Scarlet/Chapter_6
>
> > I was thinking of looking at some Sherlock Holmes and
> > may as well find that quote while I'm at it.
>
> --
> Isabelle Cecchini
Ah, thanks. I read A study in scarlet about 35 years ago so I guess
my memory is going.
Maria C.
> Maria C. wrote:
>> I've used "sb" (or "s/b") for the past 40-some years to mean "should
>> be."*
>>
>> Also: "wb" or "w/b" for "would be" or "will be," depending on
>> context; "r" for "are"; a dot (positioned where an apostrophe would
>> be) for "ing"; and many other abbreviations wc I cnt rem now.
>>
>> If I still have the book, I'll look up some more.
>
> A danger of using too many abbreviations is that you won't remember
> what they all mean when you review your notes.
> A newspaper article or report can take longer to read, in my
> experience, when the writer goes overboard with acronyms and
> abbreviations, for the reader has to go back to the beginning of the
> article to find out what the author is referring to.
> Therefore, abbreviations and many acronyms suck, in my opinion.
As "angelgloww" suggests, there's usually not that much difficulty when
making notes for oneself. Time, of course, makes the difference.
(Reviewing notes sooner rather than later is best.) Also, if your
shorthand (or use of abbreviations such as sb, etc.) is consistent,
you'll do just fine.
You mentioned repeated acronyms in news or magazine articles. I agree
that they can be a pain and a problem.
By the way, whatever happened to this form: "Usenettian English
Usage Society (UEUS)"? Nowadays, I see full phrases/names used once, at
the beginning of the article, and the initials used later. That is,
there's no "(UEUS)" or whatever following the first use. That
parenthetical notation was easy to find if one had to look for the
meaning later on down the column.
Also: It also helps to have (or make) a list of the
symbols/abbreviations you use or encounter. I have a list of initialisms
drawn up specifically for reading newsgroups. It's part of my Web site
( http://www.familyhomefront.net/Initialisms.html ) and I refer to it
often enough to be glad I made it. (Suggested additions welcome.)
Robin Bignall
<usenet...@gEXPUNGEmail.com> wrote:
Bedford Park in Chiswick was built in the 1870s as possibly the first
"garden suburb", just after what is now the District Line to Ealing
was at that time extended to from Hammersmith to Turnham Green. Some
of its larger mansions are big enough to have a dozen bedrooms, and
were meant to provide comfort and luxury to those who couldn't quite
afford the same thing in central London. The trains didn't run any
faster in the 1870s than they do now, and it would then have taken an
hour or so to commute to the city. What I could never work out, when
I lived in a flat a stone's throw away, was where they kept the
horses.
--
Robin
(BrE)
Herts, England
Mark Brader
>>> "Mr Brown goes off to town on the 8.21" - either he started work
>>> at 9.30 or he didn't have far to go!
"David":
>> I would imagine that people didn't travel far to work in 1939.
Peter Duncanson:
> Many of them did in the London area. All those railway lines
> were there for a purpose.
On January 9, 1943, the (London) Times ran a short item reading in full
as follows:
# Sudden indisposition of the guard in charge of the 8.2 a.m. train due
# to leave Gidea Park for Liverpool Street yesterday caused hundreds of
# City workers to arrive late at their offices. The train was cancelled.
Incidentally, the same day's paper also included a letter to the editor
of some AUE interest. Mr. A. Melamid, 187, Empire Court, Wembley Park,
Middx., wrote:
# It will no doubt interest your readers that I have come across the
# words "Non-Couponable Materials" in a recent government circular.
Comments? :-)
--
Mark Brader, Toronto, m...@vex.net
MARTIANS BUILD TWO IMMENSE CANALS IN TWO YEARS.
Vast Engineering Works Accomplished in an Incredibly Short Time
by Our Planetary Neighbors. --N.Y.Times headline, August 27, 1911
My text in this article is in the public domain.
Richard Bollard
wrote:
The version I heard was a little diff'rent;
Hitler, has only got one ball
The other, is in the Albert Hall
Himmler, is very sim'lar
And Goebbels
Has no balls
At all.
--
Richard Bollard
Canberra Australia
To email, I'm at AMT not spAMT.
Richard Bollard
wrote:
>Nick filted:
>>
>>angelgloww2000*@yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>> > (I used to
>>> use w/ for with but then simplified it with just a w, as b represents
>>> "but."
>>
>>I use the medical c-bar and s-bar for "with" and "without".
>>
>>Every few years I forget and use them in a note for someone and confuse
>>them.
>
>I used to confuse scorekeepers at the bowling alley by announcing the number of
>pins down in ASL...every time I knocked down six, they'd record it as
>"three"....r
I sometimes scored darts games in roman numerals (for the fun of it
and to annoy others). Subtraction is tricky without zero.
angelgl...@yahoo.com
Be careful. One day a judge may sentence you to XLIV years in prison for
doing that.
Chuck Riggs
"Gregg" sounds familiar. If memory serves me, many secretaries in the
U.S. followed the method taught in those manuals.
--
Regards,
Chuck Riggs
Near Dublin, Ireland
Don Aitken
Not many would have used the District. There was an enormous variety
of services to the central London from that area; a fact which played
a major role in its development. They included the LSWR to Waterloo or
Ludgate Hill from Turnham Green via Clapham Junction, Midland to St
Pancras (Super Outer Circle from 1878 to 1880) and many others with a
change at Addison Road (originally Kensington, now Olympia), including
the Outer Circle to Broad Street or Victoria, and Middle Circle to
Moorgate.
--
Don Aitken
Mail to the From: address is not read.
To email me, substitute "clara.co.uk" for "freeuk.com"
Nick
>
> Anyway, we are considering the words of a song. "Eight twenty
> one" has the right number of syllables and suitable stress
> pattern.
>
> Am I alone in thinking that in BrE "the 8.21" would normally be
> understood as referring to a train rather than to a bus?
"My baby takes the morning train...
I went by bus,
My baby takes the morning bus
He works from nine to five and then...
Actually I spent all day with a whore"
Thank you Not the Nine O'Clock News.
Nick
> Bob Cunningham wrote:
>> On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 16:07:40 +0100, Fred Springer
>> <fred.s...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Roland Hutchinson wrote:
>>>> Bob Cunningham wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 11 Aug 2008 18:05:23 -0400, Roland Hutchinson
>>>>> <my.sp...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> [...]
>>>>>
>>>>>> ceteris paribus (=all other things being equal): a bit obscure,
>>>>> I wonder if it would be more accurate to say "ceteris paribus" means
>>>>> "other things being equal" and not necessarily "all other things".
>>>> It would certainly be more literal. I think the English version
>>>> usually
>>>> includes the "all" -- very little if any difference in meaning
>>>> whether it's
>>>> there or not, I would judge.
>>>>
>>>>> "Ceteris paribus" will always be associated in my mind with _Lasker's
>>>>> Manual of Chess_, by Emanuel Lasker. He used it quite a few times in
>>>>> that book, and that may be the only place I've encountered it until
>>>>> now.
>>>> Interesting. I think I first encountered it in some mathematical
>>>> treatise
>>>> or other: maybe logic or model theory or something along those
>>>> lines. It's
>>>> not something I bump into often, for sure.
>>> The phrase occurs rather a lot in economic theory, where
>>> relationships between two variables are investigated on the
>>> assumption that other variables in the system remain constant.
>>>
>>> One of the frustrations -- and charms -- of studying economics is
>>> that in practice ceteris never are paribus, rendering fruitless most
>>> attempts to validate theory by reference to the real world.
>>
>> In your economics experience, how is "ceteris paribus" pronounced?
>>
>> I would like to pronounce it "SET@r@s PER@b@s", following the
>> precedent of "et cetera", but the _New Shorter Oxford_ lists
>> "KATE@ris" in first place, followed by "set-", then "seet-".
>> My favorite American dictionary, the _Webster's New World College
>> Dictionary_, which is also said to be the primary dictionary for the
>> Associated Press and many newspapers, shows only the pronunciation I
>> like, "set-".
>>
>> The online _Merriam Webster's_ (m-w.com) has the "Kate" pronunciation
>> first, followed by "ket", then "set".
>>
>> Let me hasten to say that I realize the order of showing
>> pronunciations in dictionaries doesn't necessarily imply frequency of
>> use or usage preference.
>>
> In my day economists pronounced it "seteris". But my studies in the
> dismal science were a long time ago, and it may be that the "kayteris"
> pronunciation is more general now. It's certainly what's given in the
> Cassell Dictionary of Foreign Words & Phrases", with no alternative
> pronunciation offered.
>
> I have always been very wary of the pronunciation of Latin phrases that
> have become well-established in English, because I was taught the
> so-called "scientific" pronunciation of the language at school, which
> purported to be (approximately) the way it had been pronounced by the
> Romans. For example, we didn't pronounce Caesar as "seize 'er", but
> "kyzaar". "Kayteris" follows the scientific principle, whereas "seteris"
> is almost certainly what the 17th century coiners of the phrase would
> have said.
>
> Even today, saying "prima facie" in the scientific way to an English
> lawyer will make him roar with laughter. He says "primmer fayshee"
> whereas I'd been taught to say "preemah fakeeay". AP Herbert had a lot
> of fun with that in one of his court-room stories. Anyone remember them?
> "Misleading Cases in Uncommon Law" was the title of one collection of them.
Towards the end of your second paragraph I was thinking of replying,
very much along the lines of your third, so the answer to the question
is clearly "yes".
Fred Springer
> Fred Springer wrote:
>>
[1st para snipped]
>> I have always been very wary of the pronunciation of Latin phrases
>> that have become well-established in English, because I was taught the
>> so-called "scientific" pronunciation of the language at school, which
>> purported to be (approximately) the way it had been pronounced by the
>> Romans. For example, we didn't pronounce Caesar as "seize 'er", but
>> "kyzaar". "Kayteris" follows the scientific principle, whereas
>> "seteris" is almost certainly what the 17th century coiners of the
>> phrase would have said.
>>
>> Even today, saying "prima facie" in the scientific way to an English
>> lawyer will make him roar with laughter. He says "primmer fayshee"
>> whereas I'd been taught to say "preemah fakeeay". AP Herbert had a lot
>> of fun with that in one of his court-room stories. Anyone remember
>> them? "Misleading Cases in Uncommon Law" was the title of one
>> collection of them.
>
> Towards the end of your second paragraph I was thinking of replying,
> very much along the lines of your third, so the answer to the question
> is clearly "yes".
Oh good. So many authors I enjoyed reading in my teens seem forgotten
and out of print today, and it's always nice to learn that someone else
remembers them too.
Richard Bollard
Ah, XII then double-XVI.
Amethyst Deceiver
says...
> Linz Endell:
> >>> "Mr Brown goes off to town on the 8.21" - either he started work
> >>> at 9.30 or he didn't have far to go!
>
> "David":
> >> I would imagine that people didn't travel far to work in 1939.
>
> Peter Duncanson:
> > Many of them did in the London area. All those railway lines
> > were there for a purpose.
>
> On January 9, 1943, the (London) Times ran a short item reading in full
> as follows:
>
> # Sudden indisposition of the guard in charge of the 8.2 a.m. train due
> # to leave Gidea Park for Liverpool Street yesterday caused hundreds of
> # City workers to arrive late at their offices. The train was cancelled.
>
> Incidentally, the same day's paper also included a letter to the editor
> of some AUE interest. Mr. A. Melamid, 187, Empire Court, Wembley Park,
> Middx., wrote:
>
> # It will no doubt interest your readers that I have come across the
> # words "Non-Couponable Materials" in a recent government circular.
>
> Comments? :-)
Solely that so many trains are delayed and cancelled these days it
doesn't even make the local news.
John Holmes
> Bedford Park in Chiswick was built in the 1870s as possibly the first
> "garden suburb", just after what is now the District Line to Ealing
> was at that time extended to from Hammersmith to Turnham Green. Some
> of its larger mansions are big enough to have a dozen bedrooms, and
> were meant to provide comfort and luxury to those who couldn't quite
> afford the same thing in central London. The trains didn't run any
> faster in the 1870s than they do now, and it would then have taken an
> hour or so to commute to the city.
I don't know about London, but many trains here (Melbourne) take
significantly longer now that they did in the 1870s. It's because there
are a lot more intermediate stations and a lot more passengers getting
on and off.
--
Regards
John
for mail: my initials plus a u e
at tpg dot com dot au
Iannis
I recently translated a text from Dutch into English. Whereas in
Dutch, there is a valid option to abbreviate "in samenwerking met" to
"i.s.m.", in English, no abbreviation seems to exist for "in
collaboration with" that is commonly accepted. The typesetter asked me
whether he could use "i.c.w.", but I am in doubt.
Can you give advice and/or a good and shorter alternative?
Thanks in advance!
Iannis
Derek Turner
Some context would help. The Latin 'cum' can be used in some
circumstances.
Jim Karatassos
We do not abbreviate "in collaboration with" in English.
This phrase is relatively formal. In informal texts, we would use
"along with" or "cooperating with" or a similar phrase. I agree that
some more context would be in order before we could give you an answer
that wouldn't be misleading.
John Swindle
<iannis.g...@gmail.com> wrote:
>. . .
>. . .
There is no such abbreviation in any version of English that I know
of. If we're naming the authors of a work, two very simple
possibilities are "and" and "with".
"And" suggests joint authorship. The first author listed is the
primary author.
"With" is a little different and is usually reserved for books: the
first author listed is famous, but the second author wrote the book!
Others may of course correct my views of the matter.
Jitze
<iannis.g...@gmail.com> wrote:
Unfortunately, Dutch is comparatively rich in these kind of
abbreviations (expressed as the intial letters of a compound
phrase) and they are quite commonly used and widely
understood, but there is no similar habit/tradition in
English. Beyond "i.e." and "e.g." I can't think of anything
comparable - and these two are derived from Latin phrases.
In Dutch however, there are quite a few that one comes across
in daily discourse
O.I.D. (or something like that)
O.A. (Amongst others)
I.V.M (In connection with)
...are just three that I can think of off the top of my head and
for which I have often wanted an English equivalent.
Jitze
R H Draney
>
>Unfortunately, Dutch is comparatively rich in these kind of
>abbreviations (expressed as the intial letters of a compound
>phrase) and they are quite commonly used and widely
>understood, but there is no similar habit/tradition in
>English. Beyond "i.e." and "e.g." I can't think of anything
>comparable - and these two are derived from Latin phrases.
An idiomatic equivalent of "i.e." in English is the phrase "that is to
say"...one seldom finds it abbreviated....r
--
Evelyn Wood just looks at the pictures.
Nick
>
> Unfortunately, Dutch is comparatively rich in these kind of
> abbreviations (expressed as the intial letters of a compound
> phrase) and they are quite commonly used and widely
> understood, but there is no similar habit/tradition in
> English. Beyond "i.e." and "e.g." I can't think of anything
> comparable - and these two are derived from Latin phrases.
IWO, ISTM that you are saying we don't abbreviate common phrases in
English. IMHO you are only partly right, it depends on the written
English dialect in question, BICBW. HTH, HAND.
Mike Connally
Jitze <coup...@znet.com> wrote:
> In Dutch however, there are quite a few that one comes across
> in daily discourse
>
> O.I.D. (or something like that)
> O.A. (Amongst others)
> I.V.M (In connection with)
AUB (if you please)
--
Mike Connally
Had to take action 'against spam'. Remove those words to reply.
Roland Hutchinson
Even with Latin-derived phrases and abbreviations you have to be careful, as
speakers of different languages will know different ones. A native German
speaker sprang _per pedes_ on me a few years ago -- I forget whether in
German or in English -- in reference to travelling somewhere on foot. I
had to think for a couple of seconds.
--
Roland Hutchinson Will play viola da gamba for food.
NB mail to my.spamtrap [at] verizon.net is heavily filtered to
remove spam. If your message looks like spam I may not see it.
Roland Hutchinson
W.r.t abbreviations in English, it occurs to me that many of them are used
as professional jargon on in restricted domains of discourse, and will not,
c.p., be understood generally. Often there is no need for them to be
understood outside of a particualr subject area: where else but in a
mathematical argument would you need "wlog"?
Roland Hutchinson
> In article <j18t94diref4fqu3s...@4ax.com>,
> Jitze <coup...@znet.com> wrote:
>
>> In Dutch however, there are quite a few that one comes across
>> in daily discourse
>>
>> O.I.D. (or something like that)
>> O.A. (Amongst others)
>> I.V.M (In connection with)
>
> AUB (if you please)
Not infrequently abbreviated "s.v.p." but pronounced as though abbreviated
AUB.
You gotta love the Dutch language.
(Okay, I guess it's optional if you are a member of the French Community in
Belgium.)
Garrett Wollman
Roland Hutchinson <my.sp...@verizon.net> wrote:
>Even with Latin-derived phrases and abbreviations you have to be careful, as
>speakers of different languages will know different ones. A native German
>speaker sprang _per pedes_ on me a few years ago -- I forget whether in
>German or in English -- in reference to travelling somewhere on foot. I
>had to think for a couple of seconds.
And it is of course less fashionable than it once was to festoon one's
speech or writing with Latin phrases (or indeed German or French
phrases, usually quoting famous philosophers). One of the criticisms
of Stephen Jay Gould's writing style was that he did not eschew such
references (which, in the language of today's political discourse,
could be described as "dog whistles" to those of a certain age and
bent who learned Latin as a prerequisite to a scientific career). But
he was a positive lightweight compared to those masters of linguistic
excess, the Victorians. (Even fairly late in the Victorian era,
authors like Conan Doyle, writing for the popular press, would
frequently quote the famous French and German writers of his day, as
when Sherlock Holmes makes a snarky comment about one of his
police-detective clients: "Un sot peut toujours trouver un plus sot
qui l'admire.")
-GAWollman
--
Garrett A. Wollman | The real tragedy of human existence is not that we are
wol...@csail.mit.edu| nasty by nature, but that a cruel structural asymmetry
Opinions not those | grants to rare events of meanness such power to shape
of MIT or CSAIL. | our history. - S.J. Gould, Ten Thousand Acts of Kindness
Chuck Riggs
<mi...@deadagainstspamstart.com> wrote:
>In article <j18t94diref4fqu3s...@4ax.com>,
> Jitze <coup...@znet.com> wrote:
>
>> In Dutch however, there are quite a few that one comes across
>> in daily discourse
>>
>> O.I.D. (or something like that)
>> O.A. (Amongst others)
>> I.V.M (In connection with)
This is an English language group.
>AUB (if you please)
Whatever.
John Kane
Sherlock Holmes makes a snarky comment about one of his
> police-detective clients: "Un sot peut toujours trouver un plus sot
> qui l'admire.")
I thought I'd read most of Doyle but I don't remember that one. What
story is it in? I was thinking of looking at some Sherlock Holmes and
may as well find that quote while I'm at it.
John Kane Kingston ON Canada
John Kane
> Roland Hutchinson <my.spamt...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> >Even with Latin-derived phrases and abbreviations you have to be careful, as
> >speakers of different languages will know different ones. A native German
> >speaker sprang _per pedes_ on me a few years ago -- I forget whether in
> >German or in English -- in reference to travelling somewhere on foot. I
> >had to think for a couple of seconds.
>
> And it is of course less fashionable than it once was to festoon one's
> speech or writing with Latin phrases (or indeed German or French
> phrases, usually quoting famous philosophers). One of the criticisms
> of Stephen Jay Gould's writing style was that he did not eschew such
> references (which, in the language of today's political discourse,
> could be described as "dog whistles" to those of a certain age and
> bent who learned Latin as a prerequisite to a scientific career). But
> he was a positive lightweight compared to those masters of linguistic
> excess, the Victorians. (Even fairly late in the Victorian era,
> authors like Conan Doyle, writing for the popular press, would
> frequently quote the famous French and German writers of his day, as
> when Sherlock Holmes makes a snarky comment about one of his
> police-detective clients: "Un sot peut toujours trouver un plus sot
> qui l'admire.")
Perhaps we should be thankful. I read French reasonably well and in
the last two or three years of reading mystery books have almost never
found that the French used is correct. If I remember correctly one
sentence was " Appeler moi" .
I believe other aue denizens have commented on this same problem in
other languages.
Isabelle Cecchini
> On Aug 10, 6:52 pm, woll...@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman) wrote:
>
>> Sherlock Holmes makes a snarky comment about one of his
>> police-detective clients: "Un sot peut toujours trouver un plus sot
>> qui l'admire.")
>
> I thought I'd read most of Doyle but I don't remember that one. What
> story is it in?
It's in /A Study in Scarlet/, with a slightly different wording:
'Un sot trouve toujours un plus sot qui l'admire.'
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/A_Study_in_Scarlet/Chapter_6
> I was thinking of looking at some Sherlock Holmes and
> may as well find that quote while I'm at it.
--
Isabelle Cecchini
Mark Brader
> W.r.t abbreviations in English, it occurs to me that many of them
> and will not, c.p., be understood generally.
Well, I'm familiar with "with respect to" (although I'd say it requires
three periods or none, not two), but the other one escapes me.
> Often there is no need for them to be understood outside of a
> particular subject area: where else but in a mathematical argument
> would you need "wlog"?
Good example. For those who may be curious, it's "without loss of
generality", and it occurs in situations like this. Say that you
are trying to prove triangle ABC is isosceles with side AB = AC,
and you decide to prove it by contradiction, i.e. you will assume
that AB and AC are unequal and prove something that's false, thus
proving that the assumption was wrong. If there is nothing important
that distinguishes the roles of points B and C, once you assume that
AB and AC are unequal you can also arbitrarily assume that a specific
one is the greater. So (using != to represent "not equal"), you might
write "Assume that AB != AC; wlog, AB > AC".
Another abbreviation that's pretty much purely mathematical is "iff"
for "if and only if".
When I'm making notes while debugging a computer program, I find it
helpful to have an abbreviation for "should be", so I write "sb".
I'm sure I'm not the only person who's invented that one for that
purpose, but I've never seen anyone else use it.
--
Mark Brader "MSB is an accepted explanation for men's
Toronto misbehaviors. ... Just blame it on MSB
m...@vex.net and everyone nods their heads." -- "TJ"
My text in this article is in the public domain.
Roland Hutchinson
> Roland Hutchinson (copyedited):
>> W.r.t abbreviations in English, it occurs to me that many of them
>> are used as professional jargon in restricted domains of discourse,
>> and will not, c.p., be understood generally.
>
> Well, I'm familiar with "with respect to" (although I'd say it requires
> three periods or none, not two),
It was a typo; I meant to put three periods. Chalk it up to Usenet being a
bad influence.
> but the other one escapes me.
ceteris paribus (=all other things being equal): a bit obscure, and a bit of
a stretch that I threw in deliberately to make -- or stretch -- a point.
Bob Cunningham
<my.sp...@verizon.net> wrote:
[...]
>ceteris paribus (=all other things being equal): a bit obscure,
I wonder if it would be more accurate to say "ceteris paribus" means
"other things being equal" and not necessarily "all other things".
"Ceteris paribus" will always be associated in my mind with _Lasker's
Manual of Chess_, by Emanuel Lasker. He used it quite a few times in
that book, and that may be the only place I've encountered it until
now.
--
30
John O'Flaherty
I checked AHD and M-W, and both give the etymology as "other things",
but the meaning as "all other things".
--
John