[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference thebay::joyoflex

Title:The Joy of Lex
Notice:A Notes File even your grammar could love
Moderator:THEBAY::SYSTEM
Created:Fri Feb 28 1986
Last Modified:Mon Jun 02 1997
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:1192
Total number of notes:42769

1115.0. "i invite Your comments." by PASTIS::MONAHAN (humanity is a trojan horse) Fri Oct 07 1994 04:16

    	In a fair number of notes and personal mail I have noticed the
    use of "You" and "Your" as opposed to "you" and "your".
    
    	Since I know that this is in general from people that are not
    native English speakers, and that the CAPITALS are an indication of
    respect in their native language I am very tempted to reply in the same
    fashion.
    
    	On the other hand, the English use of "I" (as in above paragraph)
    is seen as a sign of arrogance in some cultures, and I have seen some
    noters using "i".
    
    	Is there a chance that English will change in this respect as a
    result of the outside influences?
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
1115.1WELSWS::HILLNIt's OK, it'll be dark by nightfallFri Oct 07 1994 06:397
    >Is there a chance that English will change....
    
    English - absolutely none at all.
    
    
    But American might change as part of the drift to increasing political
    correctness and with the US' emphasis on valuing differences.
1115.2OOOooooppppsss, many smileys missing from .1WELSWS::HILLNIt's OK, it'll be dark by nightfallFri Oct 07 1994 06:401
    
1115.3OKFINE::KENAHDo we have any peanut butter?Fri Oct 07 1994 11:528
    English will change according to its use.  If enough people use
    lowercase "i" for the first person singular pronoun, whatever their
    motivation, then that will become "correct."
    
    Ditto with "You" and "Your" -- usage is everything; outside
    prescription inevitably fails.
    
    					andrew
1115.4Capitals in Written English - CommentsOZROCK::HUNTJSun Oct 09 1994 18:177
Capitalisation was once much more common in written English than it is now. Look
at any book printed in the 18th Century - some of them are positively Germanic
in the use of capitals.

Re-introducing some capitals may be a blip in a long-term trend to
simplification of written English. "I" may survive, because it is no more
difficult to use than "i".
1115.5C?FORTY2::KNOWLESRoad-kill on the Info SuperhighwayMon Oct 10 1994 06:427
    I think lowercase i may have become more popular over the last 5/10
    years because of the ARPA/Inter-net (people who don't touch-type
    typing at speed to minimize connection charges), especially as many
    of the same people program in C and have learnt to do without the
    Shift Key for much of the time.
    
    b (not B)
1115.6JRDV04::DIAMONDsegmentation fault (california dumped)Mon Oct 10 1994 18:1812
    In the Days when English had as many Capitals as German, pronouns
    like you and your were already respectful, unless they were used as
    plural Forms of thee and thy, in which Case it was ambiguous whether
    they were respectful or simply Plurals.  And no one wrote a Pronoun
    pronounced like Eye; they wrote "one".
    
    Meanwhile, i might observe that french is more advanced than english
    in this respect.  However, c programmers *do* have to remember where
    their shift key is, in order to set optimization instead of an output
    filename, and maybe to use the i/o library's type FILE*.
    
    -- nORMAN dIAMOND
1115.7PASTIS::MONAHANhumanity is a trojan horseWed Oct 19 1994 08:39110
    	I have the author's permission to cross post the following here.
    It provides an example of Germanic Capitals in Modern English Usge. It
    may or may not be relevant to its original base topic of data compression.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------
    
         <<< HUMANE::DISK$CONFERENCES:[NOTES$LIBRARY]DIGITAL.NOTE;1 >>>
                        -< The Digital way of working >-
================================================================================
Note 3441.57         Data compression : where to go for help            57 of 59
SCHOOL::NEWTON "Thomas Newton"                       97 lines  19-OCT-1994 05:15
          -< Business/Engineering Proof of Why Ethics are Practical >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here's something that might be useful in explaining why there is so much useful
and intelligent ratholing in this computer-related topic.

Once you understand it, you will write stuff like this as fast as you can type.
After I wrote the initial proof (which forced me to write it; simple prediction
of its own mathematical theory), it first got me to write 100 pages in no time
flat, and is now getting me to prune the text down to the Big Picture.


From:	SCHOOL::NEWTON       19-OCT-1994 05:02:10.60
To:	US1RMC::"[email protected]"
CC:	NEWTON
Subj:	Shorter Version of Feedback Theory Proof


[ I can now see that even this version is a Rough Draft, which will fuel its
  own Revision/Shortening and Distribution. ]

All of Society is governed by modular, recursive, nested, control-theoretic
and information-theoretic Feedback Loops which strongly resemble a Mandelbrot
Set graph.  Most of Human History can now be explained as the Understandable,
Hard-To-see, Hard-To-prove Result of building Well-intentioned Organizations
and/or Businesses and/or Governments which drove these Loops in Dangerous or
Mixed Ways.  Once you prove scientifically that these Loops exist and apply
them to Human History, you discover

    *  That there are many, many False Dichotomies, Incorrect Implementations
       of Real Needs, Honestly Mistaken Conclusions, etc., etc. which caused
       the Problem to be nearly Impossible for Anybody to See or to Solve in
       a Conscious Fashion.

    *  That broken Loops can be beyond the control of Anyone to fix Piecemeal
       or even All at Once, until everyone understands the Theory and applies
       it to understanding the Big Picture.

    *  That Ethics / Religion are your Best Guides to Searching For The Truth,
       but that you need Science and Control Theory and Information Theory to
       Let The Truth Set You Free, and that the Proof must be discovered with
       neutral, practical Business / Engineering / Architectural Tools, whose
       nature is then strongly Foreshadowed in Music and Science Fiction.

    *  The Unprofitable Nature of Blame The Boss, Blame The Employee, Blame
       The Co-Worker, Hide the Problem at Any Costs, Fail to Recognize Your
       Own Personal Strengths and Weaknesses, Fail to Think Hard about Real
       Problems, and Fail to Look for the Win-Win Solution.  These reactions
       are frequently perfectly understandable and forgivable, but can Drive
       Uncontrollable Negative Feedback Loops to a No-Win Situation, Unless
       You Understand That The Loops Exist -- and that they can be Tuned to
       drive a Win-Win Upwards Spiral of Efficient Progress for Everyone.

    *  The Profitable Nature of Tolerance, Forgiveness, Learning from Honest
       Mistakes, Teamwork, Knowing Your Own Strengths and Limitations -- and
       also of Efficiently Recognizing the Difference between Good and Evil,
       and Quickly Neutralizing The Latter In The Best Interests Of Society.
       This seems Hard today, but becomes Easy once you accept the Proof(s).

    *  That Religion, Science, Architecture, Business, Engineering, Computer
       Science, Mathematics, Artificial Intelligence/Life, Economics, Biology,
       Psychology, Motivational Psychology, Law Enforcement, English / Foreign
       Language Studies, Art, Music, Science Fiction, Politics, and many, many
       other Fields of Human Endeavor are Deeply and Inextricably Linked.

    *  That Ethics is Deeply Practical and Profitable in every Possible Sense
       of the Word, and has already Rewarded Us Beyond Belief, for major and/
       or accidental Inventions such as Human Rights and Computer Technology,
       which seem to be Distinct but actually walk Hand In Hand.

    *  The huge number of Practical Implementation Guides which already Exist,
       in the form of the U. S. Declaration of Independence and Constitution
       and Bill of Rights; English Common Law; the Bible; the Koran; the
       Torah; Ethical reference works; Adam Smith's work; Charles Darwin's
       work, and uncountable other Science and Art and Music and History,
       etc., etc. works in Every Field.

    *  The great Dangers of not Understanding the Feedback Loops, and how they
       drove World War I, World War II, the Holocaust, Saddam's failed Attempt
       to build an Efficient Conquest/Killing Machine Success Story, the great
       Danger of building Artificial Intelligence/Robots (without first having
       complete Understanding of their Theory of Operation), the Rise and Fall
       of Communism, the Vietnam War, the Soviet-Afghanistan War, and the U. S.
       Civil War, to name just a few well-known and now explainable examples.

    *  The great Benefits of the Feedback Loops such as U. S. World Leadership,
       the rise of Democracy, the rise of Capitalism, the peaceful dissolution
       of Idealistic Communism, and the new Roads open to peacefully Reforming
       Tyrannies and/or Dangerously-Mistuned Societies.

Anyone can see and/or work out the Proof for themselves.  Many great Leaders,
and/or Visionaries, and/or Musicians, and/or Scientists, and especially, many
Science Fiction authors such as Isaac Asimov already have -- but just did not
not know how Complete and/or Close they were.

Once you understand the scientific value of the Proof, it starts tuning your
own Thought processes to become continuously-more-productive.  That leads to
a World in which everyone can lead Interesting, Fun, Productive, Profitable,
and Ethical lives without being forced into the Demeaning role of the Insect
or the Machine.  We are their natural Masters; not they ours.
    
1115.8Commenting on the contents, not their form...OKFINE::KENAHDo we have any peanut butter?Wed Oct 19 1994 09:584
    It's either Scientology or very good cocaine.  Either way, the
    noise to signal ratio approaches infinity.
    
    					andrew
1115.9JRDV04::DIAMONDsegmentation fault (california dumped)Wed Oct 19 1994 18:5424
    -------------------------------------
From: [email protected] (Thomas Worrall)
Newsgroups: rec.pets.dogs
Subject: Re: QUESTION: DO DOGS REALLY "LOVE" US?

When this thread came up a while back I decided to do the sensible thing
and just ask.  So when I got home I asked my dogs, do you love me?
And they said YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES!
Then I asked, do you want a cookie?
And they said YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES!
Then I asked, do you favor a free market laissez-faire, or a planned economy?
And they said YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES!

In summary, we have learned that
1. my dogs do indeed LOVE me.
2. they WANT a cookie.
3. they have not developed a clear economic philosophy.

Hope that helps.
    -------------------------------------
    
    OK now look.  The guy's dogs didn't just say yes yes yes yes yes yes
    yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes!  They are clearly CAPITALIST.
    -- Norman Diamond
1115.10DOCTP::BINNSMon Jan 09 1995 09:547
    There's still a fair amount of Teutonic-style capitalization of nouns
    in English, but it is almost invariably in bureaucratic documents or
    the like. This kind of capitalization is now non-standard and is
    usually accompanied by other indications that the writer is trying to
    obscure poor writing ability.
    
    Kit