T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
2285.1 | Nope | STAR::DIPIRRO | | Fri Dec 18 1992 13:25 | 4 |
| No you don't lose the package...although this rumor *did* circulate
around here. I know people who scrambled for interviews, received real
offers on paper and in Personnel in time...but then chose to take the
package and run anyway.
|
2285.2 | | FORTSC::CHABAN | Pray for Peter Pumpkinhead! | Fri Dec 18 1992 13:47 | 6 |
|
I have recieved two conflicting replies by mail. One states that
refusing an offer is equivalent to quitting.
-Ed
|
2285.3 | You should be OK, But check it out | DESERT::HORN | | Fri Dec 18 1992 13:50 | 7 |
| I know of 5 people in Services Finance that were given internal offers,
for good jobs, and refused. They went home last Friday with a smile
and a Package from DEC.
Better check with Personnel, if they are still around.
Good Luck, you're lucky to have an option!!! (package that is).
|
2285.4 | bean ctrs in Royal Robes | MR4DEC::RFRANCEY | dtn 297-5264 mro4-3/g15 | Fri Dec 18 1992 18:33 | 20 |
| I received the package and my personnel rep, who is one fine woman!!!,
told me flat out that IF I received an offer and refused it; it had no
bearing on my getting the package deal.
BTW, I got the written offer for another position at 4:23pm Friday the
11th!
Also, BTW, my old manager and his staff are the best; Isn't it funny
that they had NOTHING to say or do with this; the decisions came from
on high above - nor could they reverse the decision - no matter how
hign they went.
Also, BTW, I got my new position because of the GREAT recommendation I
got from my old manager! So, I'm obeying the call to "Go West, young
man, go West!"
See ya, pardner!
Ron
|
2285.5 | Potential Violation of Corporate Policy | AIMTEC::HIBBERT_P | Just Say kNOw | Fri Dec 18 1992 20:08 | 16 |
| RE: .4
>
> I received the package and my personnel rep, who is one fine woman!!!,
> ....
I think you should either:
a) redo your reply and omit the "fine woman" statement, or,
b) get rid of the reply all together.
The fact that your personnel rep is female and is attractive (in your
eyes) is unnecessary and potentially offensive. I don't think I *need*
to explain any further.
|
2285.6 | Huh? | ANARKY::BREWER | nevermind.... | Fri Dec 18 1992 20:37 | 4 |
|
re: -1
I didn't read the entry that way at all.
/john
|
2285.7 | Excuse me | ARAGON::GARROD | From VMS -> NT; Unix a mere page from history | Fri Dec 18 1992 21:40 | 12 |
| Re .5
I think it is your reply that is offensive. The term "fine woman" is
not perjorative at all nor does it say anything about how attractive
the noter thinks the person is. In the context of the noters reply it
is just saying (in my view) that he considers her to be doing a good
(fine) job and he has respect for her.
Now what was it that was going through your mind? Does this always go
through your mind when people mention women?
Dave
|
2285.8 | Get a grip! | ALOS01::KOZAKIEWICZ | Shoes for industry | Fri Dec 18 1992 21:40 | 9 |
| re: .5
When did the word 'fine' become so politically incorrect? My
dictionary fails to ascribe such a loaded meaning to it. If 'fine
person' would not be offensive in context, I fail to see how 'fine
woman' would be.
Al
|
2285.9 | "Power isn't always a blessing" | MR4DEC::RFRANCEY | dtn 297-5264 mro4-3/g15 | Sat Dec 19 1992 12:00 | 55 |
| re .5
Actually, I THANK you for your comment! It IS important and IMHO more
important for men to be careful with language that is felt in any way
offensive by women.
Your comment reminds me of a required course I had at seminary when I was
about half way through my Master Of Divinity degree. All seminarians were
required to take a three day course without credit on racism and sexism.
At the end of the three days, when the one hundred or so of us were having
an open discussion of the things we had learned during this brief course, I
listened to a few comments, raised my hand and was called to speak. I began
referring to an earlier colleagues statement:
"The comment that the girl over there on the other side just made
regarding ..."
What a lesson in humility I was now to learn as I got a spontaneous, rapid
and heated firestorm thrown back in my face.
"The G I R L !!!"
I was truly embarassed - and that was a GOOD thing - as it has helped me
to be much more sensitive to this day. Us men, well, at least MYSELF, are
often so used to referring to women as "girls", "ladies" and we often
don't think of how we'd feel if we're were referred to as "boys".
So, THANK YOU, and my better word could have been "person" in .4.
I didn't mention in my earlier note that this fine person also stayed at
work on that Friday night until later than 7:15pm just so that everything
was done to insure that ALL things were in place so I didn't have to be
transitioned OUT of Digital. Damn fine woman, damn fine person! BTW,
that Friday night is when our area was experienceing a fierce Nor'easter
blizzard!
Now to REALLY blow you away (said in joking, ok?), when Monday morning came
I felt really good about all that this person had done for me and I went to
her office and asked her if she accepted hugs. She said she loves to
accept them and to give them. We hugged as an expression of joy for all
that had happened.
After all, it IS traumatic to lose a job and it is also traumatic when
somebody does something so overwhelmingly good for and/or to you.
There exists within this notesfile many bashing-type comments regarding
Personnel people. My note beats to a different drum - and maybe -
just maybe I shouldn't have vented my anger by referring to others
in my subject line in .4 as "bean counters in Royal Robes".
Regards,
Ron
|
2285.10 | Context is everything | MIMS::PARISE_M | Southern, but no comfort | Sat Dec 19 1992 12:58 | 12 |
| Ron,
I thank YOU for your reply .9 because I, like the person in reply .5,
winced when I read your reply .4 .
Big difference between "fine woman" and "one fine woman!!!"
In writing, parenthetical expressions are meant to break the train
of thought. In conversation, when I hear "there goes one fine woman!!"
my head snaps to look.
fwiw
|
2285.11 | | AXEL::FOLEY | Rebel without a Clue | Sat Dec 19 1992 14:27 | 5 |
|
And folks wonder why DEC is in trouble..
mike
|
2285.12 | | ICS::CROUCH | Subterranean Dharma Bum | Mon Dec 21 1992 07:11 | 9 |
| RE: .11
Mike, it isn't just DEC it is the USA. People are too hung up on
this PC business. Ron, thanks for your note, it was an inspiration
to me. Good luck out west, wherever that may be.
Jim C.
|
2285.13 | | GRANMA::MWANNEMACHER | Lights out, party's over! | Mon Dec 21 1992 16:01 | 6 |
| RE: .11 & .12- And how!!!! I've seen women refer to men as boys, guys,
etc. Ever hear of the good ole boy network? I refer to females as
gals and males as guys, you want to bring me to the authorities? Knock
yourself out.
Mike
|
2285.14 | | STAR::ABBASI | iam your friendly psychic hotline | Mon Dec 21 1992 16:15 | 7 |
| .13
Mikey,
Go bang your head.
\nasser
|
2285.15 | .9 - thank you, others - step outside | AIMTEC::HIBBERT_P | Just Say kNOw | Mon Dec 21 1992 19:49 | 9 |
| RE: .9
Ron, thanks for the follow-up. .9 is well taken.
RE: .6,.7,.8
I trust that you have read .9? In any case rather than taking this
note down a rat-hole, I've taken the issue off-line.
|
2285.16 | | STAR::ABBASI | iam your friendly psychic hotline | Mon Dec 21 1992 20:38 | 10 |
| .15 -< .9 - thank you, others - step outside >-
iam not going to step outside, it is freezing out there!
i think the temp. here in lovely Nashua tonight is down to 10 degrees
kelvin, so you please step outside yourself, iam staying home where it is
worm and cozy.
\bye
\nasser
|
2285.17 | | GRANMA::MWANNEMACHER | Lights out, party's over! | Tue Dec 22 1992 16:07 | 1 |
| naster-Go hug yerself!
|
2285.18 | Why ? | CSC32::D_PINA | | Wed Dec 30 1992 07:52 | 1 |
| Why are you all taking the time to talk about this subject ?
|
2285.19 | | USWRSL::CHABAN_ED | | Mon Jan 04 1993 16:46 | 8 |
|
Because I need a break from looking at all the beautiful babes in the
office
;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-)
-Ed
|
2285.20 | Knock yourself out | POBOX::NEDDO | | Wed Sep 14 1994 13:50 | 2 |
| Who would bother.... This is somewhat off the subject of the orginal
question.
|
2285.21 | | TOKNOW::METCALFE | Eschew Obfuscatory Monikers | Thu Sep 15 1994 10:37 | 8 |
| Dear Thought Police,
Please post all offensive phrases, words, and intonations so that we
poor neanderthals can avoid future land mines.
People take offense more often than it is given.
Earl Sinclair
|
2285.22 | | ROWLET::AINSLEY | Less than 150 kts. is TOO slow! | Thu Sep 15 1994 11:20 | 5 |
| re: .21
What are you talking about?
Bob
|
2285.23 | 'been thumped myself for using the word "lady" in a complimentary way | TOKNOW::METCALFE | Eschew Obfuscatory Monikers | Thu Sep 15 1994 14:00 | 14 |
| .22>What are you talking about?
Thought Police = self-empowered political correctness vigilantes
If they post all the phrases, words, or intonation that would give
offense, then maybe some innocent people wouldn't get beat up for
using the offending phrases (aka land mines). Go ahead and thump
people who deserve being thumped, but using the phrase "one fine
woman" is not one that deserves a thumping. It is a phrase that
one must >find< an offense in. Hence, my comment:
.21>People take offense more often than it is given.
Earl Sinclair = Dinosaur
|
2285.24 | | KLAP::porter | this never happened to Pablo Picasso | Thu Sep 15 1994 14:02 | 2 |
| Hey, you've got to expect some sort of discontinuity
when there's a 20-month hiatus in the reply stream.
|
2285.25 | | TOKNOW::METCALFE | Eschew Obfuscatory Monikers | Thu Sep 15 1994 14:08 | 9 |
| You know something!? I thought it was odd to see /nasser replying.
I wonder how my unseen map hit on this note?
Oh. Note .20 was recent. I went to note .0 to see what the original
note was about, came across .5 and subsequent replies, and thought they
were recent. My mistake.
So thump me one.
|
2285.26 | | WRAFLC::GILLEY | Cheer up Christian, you could be dead tomorrow. | Thu Sep 15 1994 15:37 | 3 |
| Nah, I won't thump you. I wanted to see what you were talking about.
:-)
|
2285.27 | | TALLIS::PARADIS | There's a feature in my soup! | Fri Sep 16 1994 11:54 | 12 |
| .21> Please post all offensive phrases, words, and intonations so that we
.21> poor neanderthals can avoid future land mines.
Your casual use of the term "land mines" is deeply offensive to those
who have been injured or killed by buried ordnance. Also, your use of
the term "neanderthals" is offensive to our evolutionary predecessors.
Please be more sensitive in the future.
8-) 8-) 8-) 8-) 8-) - for the humor-challenged 8-) 8-) 8-) 8-) 8-)
|
2285.28 | | BROKE::HOLDEN | Technical Director, DB Integration and Interoperability | Fri Sep 16 1994 12:16 | 2 |
| Your use of the term "evolutionary" is deeply offensive to...well,
you know.
|
2285.29 | | KLAP::porter | this never happened to Pablo Picasso | Fri Sep 16 1994 13:49 | 7 |
| Using language is deeply offensive to those that
can't. In future, please just grunt and point.
[And you get the benefit that you'll be using an interaction
style which is common in today's computer systems.]
|
2285.30 | Sensitivity | BABAGI::CRESSEY | | Fri Sep 16 1994 13:50 | 10 |
| Re: .28
You may have been trying to be sensitive by not naming the group you mentioned,
but I'm afraid that the denial of their identity did more damage to their
self esteem than you would have done by being explicit.
Tsk, tsk,
Dave
;-)
|
2285.31 | Pointing? | BABAGI::CRESSEY | | Fri Sep 16 1994 13:52 | 9 |
| I'm afraid that pointing is highly ethnocentric behaviour.
You shouldn't assume that all the various peoples of the world signal things
the way you do.
Dave
;-)
|
2285.32 | | CASDOC::HEBERT | Captain Bligh | Fri Sep 16 1994 15:12 | 4 |
| I'm offended by the word "offended."
I have a right not to be -uh- that word.
|
2285.33 | Multicultural confusion | MUNDIS::SSHERMAN | Steve Sherman @MFR | Mon Sep 19 1994 09:57 | 13 |
| And all this before the rest of the world rears its head (as it herewith
is doing).
Elsewhere in this notesfile is an amusing thread that got started out
when an MCS engineer said something about "shagging calls". One of
my British neighbors wondered about that, since the verb "shag", in
British English refers to an activity that engineers are normally not
expected to engage in on site. What if that had been somehow reversed?
Is America too "sensitized" to have seen the humor in the situation?
At any rate, Brits, don't go up to an American and offer to light his fag.
Steve (conveniently out of town til Friday)
|
2285.34 | | KLAP::porter | this never happened to Pablo Picasso | Mon Sep 19 1994 10:16 | 8 |
| > "British English"
Now I'm *really* offended by that. It's just "English",
damn it. The rest of you lot who speak languages derived
from English need a qualifying adjective, but the English
do not. So there.
|
2285.35 | :-) | BASLG1::WOOD | | Mon Sep 19 1994 10:29 | 6 |
| > "British English"
Perhaps "Queen's English", although that could be misconstrued on both
sides of the pond :-)
|
2285.36 | | CSC32::M_EVANS | skewered shitake | Mon Sep 19 1994 11:03 | 2 |
| Or idomatic east side of the pond english vs. idomatic west side fo the
pond English?
|
2285.37 | Right, Meg | MUNDIS::SSHERMAN | Steve Sherman @MFR | Mon Sep 19 1994 11:21 | 16 |
| ALL English is accented. There is no "Academie" English (despite agitation
for such an agency as recently as the reign of Charles II). This is a
strength.
Anyway, I don't know how a Brit can insist that his version of the language
he sent out into the world so successfully is in any way standard. My own
observation is that every Briton has his own private accent, which may be
more or less similar to that of his friends and neighbors, depending on
geography, social class, school attended, etc. I LOVE the infinite
variety of our tongue, and find nothing more entertaining than eaves-
dropping on conversations in pubs, bathing in the language. Some of
the sounds are glorious beyond the imagination of us poor Yanks.
Is it in Luton that "No" has about four syllables?
Steve
|
2285.38 | | SXYEXE::OTTEN | David Otten @SBP - 782-2675 ASG Solent | Mon Sep 19 1994 11:24 | 7 |
| Is "Shagging Calls" better or worse than "Servicing Customers"
?
David
|
2285.39 | He took umbrage, and a cup of tea | BABAGI::CRESSEY | | Mon Sep 19 1994 11:28 | 19 |
| Re: Taking offense at the phrase "British English"
I beg to differ. English, as spoken in Great Britain, has evolved considerably
since the late 1600s, when we spoke the same way on both sides of the pond.
It has evolved in a very different direction in the USA. Canadian English
is, of course, at least 2% different from American English ;-)
Today, no one dialect of English can lay claim to the title "English" to
the exclusion of the other dialects, 'enry 'iggins comments notwithstanding.
There is widespread agreement among linguists that, of the dialects of English
still in use today, the one that most closely resembles Elizabethan English
is a dialect spoken in parts of North Carolina. Would those people have
a prior claim on the name "English" without a qualifier?
It's been said elsewhere in this conference: more offense is taken than
is given.
Dave
|
2285.40 | | HYDRA::BECK | Paul Beck | Mon Sep 19 1994 11:31 | 1 |
| Just call it OpenEnglish ...
|
2285.41 | Ah, that subtle British humor (oops: humour) | MUNDIS::SSHERMAN | Steve Sherman @MFR | Mon Sep 19 1994 11:58 | 17 |
| .39
Actually, Dave, I didn't think he was taking offense, I thought he was
being wry.
See, that's just what I meant in the reply that started this subthread.
It seems Americans not only take offense more easily than others, but
they are more likely to perceive others as having taken offense.
I've obviously been over here so long that I've totally lost touch. I'm
going to be in LA next month on vacation [holiday :-)], and I'm afraid
I'll be frosting someone off about every half hour.
What was it W. S. Gilbert said? "Just because I said I like your ruddy
countenance, doesn't mean I like your bloody cheeck."
Steve
|
2285.42 | Lu'on | WELSWS::HILLN | It's OK, it'll be dark by nightfall | Mon Sep 19 1994 12:12 | 13 |
| Re .37
>Is it in Luton that "No" has about four syllables?
As someone who lives near Luton I'd make the following observations
about the Luton accent. First, I've not heard 'no' pronounced with
more than one syllable. At the basic level it tends to be 'naaah'.
For other words you'll find the accent suppresses the hard consonants
(d and t). But then you have to add of the one of the cultural accent
attributes of either the Punjabis, Bengalis, Italians, Irish or Polish.
Also, Luton has a (?the only UK) Macdonalds which uses halal meat.
|
2285.43 | | BABAGI::CRESSEY | | Mon Sep 19 1994 12:17 | 8 |
| Re: .41
Hey, if he can be wry, I don't see any problem with me being ham!
(or maybe the in jest nature of my response also got lost!)
Good luck in LA!
|
2285.44 | Need an IPA keyboard for this | MUNDIS::SSHERMAN | Steve Sherman @MFR | Mon Sep 19 1994 12:19 | 11 |
| Strictly speaking, .42, I should have said "quadriphthong", if there is
such a word. A friend of mine lived in Luton for a number of years (he is
now in Antwerp), and when I last saw them, it struck me that his 7-year-old
daughter's pronunciation of "No" was something like
Naaa-ai-ee-u
which he (originally from Birmingham) thought terribly amusing and I found
quite breathtaking.
Steve
|
2285.45 | | BABAGI::CRESSEY | | Mon Sep 19 1994 12:25 | 4 |
| Hey my daughters are reaching the age where they can make the word
"dad" sound polysyllabic, and it isn't done with dipthongs, either!
Dave
|
2285.46 | | WELSWS::HILLN | It's OK, it'll be dark by nightfall | Mon Sep 19 1994 12:30 | 7 |
| No pronounced as something like: Naaa-ai-ee-u
could well be the hybrid product of combining "Birbigum wiv Lu'on"
during the 7 year-old's upbringing.
It should also be pointed out that as you move around in Luton there
are tremendous variations in the accents heard.
|
2285.47 | | FORTY2::DALLAS | Paul Dallas, DEC/EDI @REO2-F/F2 | Mon Sep 19 1994 12:32 | 6 |
| Re: .40
> Just call it OpenEnglish ...
Oh no, let's not. If we do that, it'll get hijacked, standardised
(standardized) and we'll all be speaking French next year.
|
2285.48 | Who, me? | TEKVAX::KOPEC | You have left basic services | Mon Sep 19 1994 12:41 | 8 |
| > See, that's just what I meant in the reply that started this subthread.
> It seems Americans not only take offense more easily than others, but
> they are more likely to perceive others as having taken offense.
"I realize this is a sweeping generalization, but as is usually the
case when I generalize, I don't care."
-- Dave Barry
|
2285.49 | what the halal is it? | NUBOAT::HEBERT | Captain Bligh | Mon Sep 19 1994 13:09 | 27 |
| RE: a few back... what the heck is halal meat (as served at a
MacDonalds)?
Thought I'd share part of this. Saw it in another conference. I've
snipped off the top and bottom, but the rest is faithfully reproduced for
your noting and offending pleasure:
======================================================================
I got a call from personnel stating that they had taken down
the ad for my house, because two people had complained
that it was offensive.
The "offense" was that the ad contained a picture of our
attractive real estate agent next to the words "Nice house with
large bedrooms."
These complainers felt that the wording was suggestive.
I forgot, you're not supposed to mention bedrooms when trying to
sell a house, especially if you're attractive.
Kinda makes me wonder if these people have too much time on their
hands!
======================================================================
...no doubt about it!
|
2285.50 | English++ ? | BASLG1::WOOD | | Mon Sep 19 1994 13:10 | 4 |
| We could call it English++, as long as no one is likely to object.
:-)
|
2285.51 | ;-) | WRAFLC::GILLEY | Cheer up Christian, you could be dead tomorrow. | Mon Sep 19 1994 13:33 | 2 |
| That has to be the worst pun I've ever read. Go punch yourself three
times. Ugh!
|
2285.52 | :-) :-) | BASLG1::WOOD | | Mon Sep 19 1994 13:52 | 3 |
| RE .51
Praise indeed! What punishment!
|
2285.53 | | NOTIME::SACKS | Gerald Sacks ZKO2-3/N30 DTN:381-2085 | Mon Sep 19 1994 14:12 | 4 |
| > RE: a few back... what the heck is halal meat (as served at a
> MacDonalds)?
Meat from animals slaughtered according to Moslem law.
|
2285.54 | | TOKNOW::METCALFE | Eschew Obfuscatory Monikers | Mon Sep 19 1994 15:13 | 134 |
| Yoiks! All this from "one fine woman"!?! I apologize for those giving and
taking offense as a result of some unadvised reaction of mine.
As for the subthread, you blokes who really need to know the history of
the English language: this was sent my way some time ago. I didn't
write it, but someone did.
-----------------------------------
The History of the English Language
Owen Alun and Brendan O'Corraidhe
In the beginning there was an island off the coast of Europe. It had
no name, for the natives had no language, only a collection of grunts
and gestures that roughly translated to "Hey!", "Gimme!", and "Pardon
me, but would you happen to have any woad?"
Then the Romans invaded it and called it Britain, because the natives
were "blue, nasty, br(u->i)tish and short." This was the start of the
importance of u (and its mispronounciation) to the language. After
building some roads, killing off some of the nasty little blue people
and walling up the rest, the Romans left, taking the language
instruction manual with them.
The British were bored so they invited the barbarians to come over
(under Hengist) and "Horsa" 'round a bit. The Angles, Saxons, and Jutes
brought slightly more refined vocal noises.
All of the vocal sounds of this primitive language were onomatapoedic,
being derived from the sounds of battle. Consonants were were derived
from the sounds of weapons striking a foe. "Sss" and "th" for example
are the sounds of a draw cut, "k" is the sound of a solidly landed axe
blow, "b", "d", are the sounds of a head dropping onto rock and sod
respectively, and "gl" is the sound of a body splashing into a bog.
Vowels (which were either gargles in the back of the throat or sharp
exhalations) were derived from the sounds the foe himself made when
struck.
The barbarians had so much fun that decided to stay for post-revel.
The British, finding that they had lost future use of the site, moved
into the hills to the west and called themselves Welsh.
The Irish, having heard about language from Patrick, came over to
investigate. When they saw the shiny vowels, they pried them loose and
took them home. They then raided Wales and stole both their cattle and
their vowels, so the poor Welsh had to make do with sheep and
consonants. ("Old Ap Ivor hadde a farm, L Y L Y W! And on that farm
he hadde somme gees. With a dd dd here and a dd dd there...")
To prevent future raids, the Welsh started calling themselves "Cymry"
and gave even longer names to their villages. They figured if no one
could pronounce the name of their people or the names of their towns,
then no one would visit them. (The success of the tactic is
demonstrated still today. How many travel agents have YOU heard suggest
a visit to scenic Llyddumlmunnyddthllywddu?)
Meantime, the Irish brought all the shiny new vowels home to Erin. But
of course they didn't know that there was once an instruction manual
for them, so they scattered the vowels throughout the language purely
as ornaments. Most of the new vowels were not pronounced, and those
that were were pronounced differently depending on which kind of
consonant they were either preceding or following.
The Danes came over and saw the pretty vowels bedecking all the Irish
words. "Ooooh!" they said. They raided Ireland and brought the vowels
back home with them. But the Vikings couldn't keep track of all the
Irish rules so they simply pronounced all the vowels "oouuoo."
In the meantime, the French had invaded Britain, which was populated by
descendants of the Germanic Angles, Saxons, and Jutes. After a
generation or two, the people were speaking German with a French accent
and calling it English. Then the Danes invaded again, crying "Oouuoo!
Oouuoo!," burning abbeys, and trading with the townspeople.
The Britons that the Romans hadn't killed intermarried with visiting
Irish and became Scots. Against the advice of their travel agents,
they descided to visit Wales. (The Scots couldn't read the signposts
that said, "This way to LLyddyllwwyddymmllwylldd," but they could smell
sheep a league away.) The Scots took the sheep home with them and made
some of them into haggis. What they made with the others we won't say,
but Scots are known to this day for having hairy legs.
The former Welsh, being totally bereft, moved down out of the hills and
into London. Because they were the only people in the Islands who
played flutes instead of bagpipes, they were called Tooters. This made
them very popular. In short order, Henry Tooter got elected King and
begin popularizing ornate, unflattering clothing.
Soon, everybody was wearing ornate, unflattering clothing, playing the
flute, speaking German with a French accent, pronouncing all their
vowels "oouuoo" (which was fairly easy given the French accent), and
making lots of money in the wool trade. Because they were rich, people
smiled more (remember, at this time, "Beowulf" and "Canterbury Tales"
were the only tabloids, and gave generally favorable reviews even to
Danes). And since it is next to impossible to keep your vowels in the
back of your throat (even if you do speak German with a French accent)
while smiling and saying "oouuoo" (try it, you'll see what I mean), the
Great Vowel Shift came about and transformed the English language.
The very richest had their vowels shifted right out in front of their
teeth. They settled in Manchester and later in Boston.
There were a few poor souls who, cut off from the economic prosperity
of the wool trade, continued to swallow their vowels. They wandered
the countryside in misery and despair until they came to the docks of
London, where their dialect devolved into the incomprehensible language
known as Cockney. Later, it was taken overseas and further brutalized
by merging it with Dutch and Italian to create Brooklynese.
That's what happened, you can check for yourself. But I advise you to
just take our word for it.
Copyright (c) 1994 Corrie Bergeron and Ben Tucker all rights reserved
Permissions: This may be reproduced in SCA newsletters for non-
commercial purposes only. (i.e., If you make any money off of it, send
us a cut. <g>)
Owen Alun is a wandering Cornish poet and harper whose travels have
taken him to EVERY group in the Northshield. Ben Tucker helps keep the
St. Paul School District moving into the Information Age. (He recently
wired his elementary school into the Internet so the kids can get
on-line!)
Brendan O Corraidhe is a wandering Irish singer and storyteller.
Corrie Bergeron is the design coordinator for the next generation of
PLATO educational software.
_____________________________________________________________________________
SCA-West Mail List for the West Kingdom of the SCA
For help or to (un)subscribe, send HELP or (UN)SUBSCRIBE to:
[email protected]
List Administration: [email protected]
Sponsored by: CSU Chico, Dept. of Computer Science & Engineering
|
2285.55 | "Look, Virgina! Socialist Claus and his Height-Impaired Helpers!" | DPDMAI::EYSTER | Seems Ah'm dancin' with cactus... | Mon Sep 19 1994 17:03 | 15 |
| re: -.49
> Kinda makes me wonder if these people have too much time on their
> hands!
This type of person predominately lives in the great frozen NorthEast
(reason enough to be surly) and apparently have memorized both
Digital's "Policy and Procedures" as well as "Political Correctness...A
Lifestyle Option". Apparently, only their interpretation of either is
valid.
We have a phrase for it here in Texas...see the personal name, it
explains it all. :^]
Tex
|
2285.56 | All for cultural richness.... | CHEFS::OSBORNEC | | Tue Sep 20 1994 04:24 | 19 |
|
This is all a long way from the base note, but ....
I must confess to being delighted to see several major articles in the
heavyweight dailies & Sundays over the past two weeks that are roundly
condemning PC in its various abstractions. Leading academics, writers,
& politicians are now becoming sirens to shout that PC is in danger of
destroying/restricting democracy, not enhancing it.
I though I was the last person in the UK to not be taken in by all
this PC stuff, but other Luddites exist & are prepared to be stand
& be counted ........ (up to about 4 so far!)
Of course, much of our language extension has been a direct result of
lack of democracy (eg invasion, pillage, war), or from travel to
different parts, as so delightfully depicted in -2....
Colin
|
2285.57 | rubbish or is it garbage ? | GVPROD::DOIGTE::Chisholm | | Wed Sep 21 1994 10:01 | 5 |
| >To say that there is just one 'English' is rubbish if you are from England
and garbage if you are from the new world. One could say that in England
they speak 'old english'. Then again you can't go more than 20 miles in
England without finding another dialect so even the English can't claim
there is one English.
|
2285.58 | "Old English?" | BABAGI::CRESSEY | | Wed Sep 21 1994 10:12 | 11 |
| The phrase "Old English" (or is it "Olde Englishe"?) has been in use
for centuries to describe the language that was in use before Middle
English. I have never been exposed to Old English, but the people who
have tell me that I'd have as much difficulty understanding it as I would
with the Westron from Middle Earth.
I think it's unnecessary to reuse this phrase for a completely new purpose.
The phrase "British English" names the language well.
Regards,
Dave
|
2285.59 | two different tongues | SMURF::WALTERS | | Wed Sep 21 1994 13:56 | 7 |
|
> British English" names the language well.
Except that there is already a class of languages called "British" or
Brythonic (Latinised from the Celtic "Prydain") that were in use for
about 5000 years before those Saxons turned up. ;-)
|
2285.60 | | PHDVAX::LUSK | Ron Lusk--[org-name of the week here] | Wed Sep 21 1994 15:25 | 9 |
| Well, this big heavy English grammar (9"x17", 4-6 inches thick, if
memory exaggerates appropriately) that I ran into in Blackwell's when I
last visited Oxford seemed happy with "BE" and "AE" for British English
and American English. If the author is willing to distinguish the two
dialects that way, so am I.
After all, AE was derived from some BE speakers who were regarded as
ne'er-do-wells by their neighbors and so moved over here to find some
properly-cooked vegetables.
|
2285.61 | How about the Scots | GVPROD::DOIGTE::Chisholm | | Thu Sep 22 1994 07:20 | 1 |
| Do the Scots believe they speak British English ?
|
2285.62 | Fit Like, Manny; Foos y' Doos | AYOV18::AYRDAM::DAGLEISHP | DM, an enabler for successful OO... | Thu Sep 22 1994 09:45 | 20 |
| Re -1 Do Scots speak British English...
Reminds of the TV programme "It will be all right on the night" where an American
TV crew were in Peterhead ( some six miles from where I stayed ) and interviewed
a local fisherman who spoke broad Doric ( a dialect unique to the North East of
Scotland from Aberdeen to Forres ).
The long and the short of it was that they gave up after not being able to
understand one word of what he said ( included 'Hey man, fit like'; 'foos you doos'
which roughly translates to Hello, how are you!! ).
The other side of the coin, though,
It has long been said the the people of Inverness speak the most proper Queen's
English of anyone in the UK.
Like the previous replies, I honestly don't think that there is such commonality
in the UK to have a collective term 'British English' ( the same as I don't think
that there is a collective term of the various dialects of US English ) - it
is only stated as such for convenience.
|
2285.63 | brutus was an honable man | VNABRW::UHL | | Thu Sep 22 1994 09:50 | 3 |
| isn't there a misspelling...
it is not British, it is brutish
|
2285.64 | | METSYS::THOMPSON | | Thu Sep 22 1994 14:25 | 23 |
|
I don't know how this rathole started ... but I'll join in anyway!!
I think the notion of 'British English' and 'American English' is quite valid.
"BE" is the main language in Great Britain, Ireland and Australia.
"AE" is the main language in the USA and Canada.
Both languages have regional variations but they are usually small variations
on the main theme. I.E American (AE) varies from region to region but you
could never confuse it with "BE". "BE" has variations but you could never
confuse it with American.
An interesting question is: which language deserves to be called 'old English'?
In my opinion it fits American better than British.
The most interesting question is: which language best deserves the title
of "English" ?
Most Europeans, that speak any English, use British English. In Germany
it seems to be about 50-50 British/American.
Mark
|
2285.65 | my 2c | WELCLU::SHARKEYA | Lunch happens - separately | Thu Sep 22 1994 15:31 | 15 |
| There's two things involved in language variation:
1. Dialect - thats the difference between London and Birmingham accents
(and American for some if it).
2. Word meanings - thats the difference between hearing the word and
assigning a different meaning based on where you live etc.
Words such as 'rubber' have two really different meanings depending on
which side of the pond you came from.
Thats how this rat-hole started - its got very little to do with the
'queens english' or 'american english' which is mainly dialect.
lan
|
2285.66 | Back into the rathole | PHDVAX::LUSK | Ron Lusk--[org-name of the week here] | Thu Sep 22 1994 16:29 | 31 |
| This note *did* get me thinking about the differences between the two
"languages" or dialects (and the similarities):
1) pronunciation differences are vast, but primarily on vowel sounds;
the consonants are similar, except where they vanish ("Lu'on" replaces
a "t" with [I assume] a glottal stop).
2) "function words" are identical (or nearly so), with assorted
semantic differences that I don't know or can't list: these are words
like "and", "in", "of", "her" (maybe), etc. I can't remember the term
for non-function words, but NF-words can be created or given extended
meanings on a whim, and the result is still English: "Nuke the Jello
after tea!", or "'Twas Brillig and the slithy toves...".
You can't create your own function words and still have an English:
"Wpow et nak course fe human events, op becomes necessary ko..."
becomes only a cryptogram.
3) Most syntax is (therefore) similar: there are a few things I haven't
caught on to, such as "The government are wasting..." vs. "The
government is wasting...", which I believe is one difference, as is
being "on holiday" or "in hospital", etc.
4) as is the joy of travelers on both sides of the pond, vocabulary
does some strange things, but the difference is only a hair greater
than that between (say) Southern California (where I grew up) and
Boston (where I went to college): "Put an elastic around this while I
get a frappe and some scrod, will you?" was barely intelligible,
even without the local accent.
Well, perhaps we can leave the rathole sometime... ;^)
|
2285.67 | Rathole continues! | BABAGI::CRESSEY | | Thu Sep 22 1994 17:21 | 19 |
| Re: .66
A side note with regard to "The government is" vs "The government are".
In the US, prior to the Civil War, the customary usage was to treat the
name (then called "style") of the country as plural, as in
The United States are opposed to ....
After the Civil War, the usage changed to :
The United States is opposed to ...
Talk about E Pluribus Unum!
(Source: Southern historian Shelby Foote (last name?) in the documentary
'The Civil War')
Dave
|
2285.68 | English is tough stuff | ZUR01::JAUNIN | Though through, plough, cough or tough | Fri Sep 23 1994 06:02 | 123 |
| Text by Jean Libman Block
Scanned (typos made by OCR :-)) with DEC Hard- and Software
andre
Multi- national personnel at North Atlantic Treaty Organisation Headquarters
near Paris found English an easy language until they tried to pronounce it.
To help them discard an array of accents, the verses below were devised.
After trying them, a Frenchman said he'd prefer six months' hard labour
to reading six lines aloud.
Dearest Creature in Creation,
Study English pronunciation.
I will teach you in my verse
Sounds like corpse, corps, horse and worse
I will keep you, Susy, busy,
Make your head with heat grow dizzy;
Tear in eye, your dress will tear,
So shall I!! Oh, hear my prayer,
Just compare heart, beard and heard,
Dies and diet, lord and word,
Sword and sward, retain and Britain
(Mind the latter, how it's written).
Now I surely will not plague you
With such words as vague and ague,
But be careful how you speak:
Say break, steak, but bleak and streak,
Clove, oven, how and low,
Script, receipt, shoe, poem, toe.
Hear me say, devoid of trickery,
Daughter, laughter and Terpsichore,
Typhoid, measles, topsails, aisles,
Exiles, similes, reviles;
Scholar, vicar and cigar,
Solar, mica, war and far;
One, anemone; Balmoral,
Kitchen, lichen, laundry, laurel;
Certrude, German, wind and mind,
Scene, Melpomene, mankind.
Billet does not sound like ballet,
Bouquet, wallet, mallet, chalet,
Blood and flood are not Hke food,
Nor is mould Eke should and would.
Viscous, viscount; load and broad,
Toward, to forward, to reward,
And your pronunciation's O.K.
When you correctly say croquet.
Rounded, wounded; grieve and sleeve,
Friend and fiend; alive and live;
Liberty, library; heave and heaven,
Rachel, ache, mustache, eleven.
We say hallowed but allowed,
People, leopnrd, towed but vowed.
Mark the difference moreover
Between mover, plover, Dover;
Leeches, breeches; wise, precise,
Chalice, but police and lice;
Camel, constable, unstnble,
Principle, disciple, label;
Petal, penal and canal.
Wait, surprise, plait, promise, pal.
Worm and storm; chaise, chaos, chair,
Scnntor, spectator. mayor;
Ivey, privy; famous, clamour;
And enamour rhymes with hammer.
River, rival, tomb, bomb, comb,
Doll and roll and some and home;
Stranger does not rhyme with anger,
Neither does devour with clangour,
Soul but foul, and gaunt but aunt,
Font, front, wont; want, grand and aunt.
Shoes, goes, does; now fust say frnger
And then: singer, ginger, linger;
Real, zeal, mauve, gauze and gauge,
Marriage, foliage, mirage, age.
Query does not rhyme with very,
Nor does fury sound like bury;
Dost, lost, post and doth, cloth, loth,
Job, job, bosom, oath;
Though the difference seems little,
We say actual but victual;
Refer does not rhyme with deafer,
Foeffer does, and zephyr, heifer;
Dull, bull; and George, ate, late,
Mint, pint; senate and sedate,
Scenic, Arabic, paciflc,
Science, conscience, scientiflc;
Tour but our and succour, four;
Gas and alas and Arkansas!
Sea, idea, gninea, area.
Psalm, Maria, but malaria;
Youth, south, southern, cleanse and clean,
Doctrine, turpentine, marine;
Compare alien with Italian,
Dandelion and Battalion.
Sally with ally; yes, ye,
Eye, I, ay, aye, whey, key, quay!
Say aver, but ever fever,
Neither, leisure, skein, deceiver;
Heron, granary, canary,
Crevice and device and eyrie;
Face but preface, and efface,
Phlegm, Phlegmatic; ass, glass, bass.
Large but target, gin, give, verging,
Ought, out, joust and scour, but scourging,
Ear but earn, and wear and tear
Do not rhyme with here, but ere.
Seven is right, but so is even,
Hyphen, roughen, nephew, Stephen;
Monkey, donkey, clerk and jerk
Asp, grasp, wasp; and cork and work.
Pronunciation - think of Psyche!
Is a paling stout and spikey?
Won't it make you lose your wits,
Writing `groats' and saying `grits'?
It's a dark abyss or tunnel,
Strewn with stones, like rowlock. gunwhale;
Islington and Isle of Wight,
Housewife, verdict and indict.
Finally, which rhymes with enough;
Though through, plough, cough or tough?
Hiccough has the sound of `cup'-
My advice is: Give it up!
|
2285.69 | One week later... | MUNDIS::SSHERMAN | Steve Sherman @MFR | Mon Sep 26 1994 10:41 | 27 |
| Having at least helped to start this rathole, I admit it was cowardly
to then up and leave town (but when stern duty calls...), but it's been
a lovely subthread indeed. .54 and .68 are both thoroughly delightful.
I had always considered Cable and Bough (or is it Bough and Cable) to be
the standard (American) work on the history of the language; it now re-
linquishes pride of place to .54; and .68 reminds me again to commend
our nonnative English language noters, who write on the whole very well
in our difficult tongue.
To .64 I would argue that there is no single "English". Here in Germany,
they teach something they call "Oxford English" in the schools. I tell
anyone who will listen that there is no such thing; that there is an
artificial language known as "Oxbridge", which is spoken by placing a
pear in your mouth; and that what they mean is a language called "Received
Pronunciation" or simply RP, which is essentially London/Home Counties
English stripped of regional and class effects. Once upon a time it was
also called "BBC English", before the BBC sanctioned regional accents.
RP is a good least common denominator, understood by virtually any
English speaker anywhere (though spoken by very few indeed), but it is
no more "the one true English" than any other.
My German friends, whose own language is a compromise among a staggering
variety of dialects, generally do not believe that anyone would permit
a language to exist without scholarly regulation, but of course we English
speakers have resisted just that for many centuries.
Steve
|
2285.70 | wrong fruit, old fruit | ANNECY::HUMAN | I came, I saw, I conked out | Mon Sep 26 1994 12:57 | 4 |
| <.1>
>by placing a pear in your mouth
That I would like to see (and hear!). Shouldn't that be _plum_?
|
2285.71 | Too tough for papa | GUESS::CARRASCO | I'll worry about that `just in time' | Wed Sep 28 1994 16:08 | 12 |
| I printed out .68 and gave it to my father, whose native tongue is Spanish.
(I fixed all the typos I could first.) He wouldn't even try to read it aloud,
but he did laugh a few times.
One word stumped me too:
Refer does not rhyme with deafer,
Foeffer does, and zephyr, heifer;
What's a "Foeffer" ? Is this another scanner typo?
Pilar.
|
2285.72 | | DSSDEV::RUST | | Wed Sep 28 1994 16:59 | 11 |
| Re .71: I (waving my hands wildly) deduced that "Foeffer" was either a
proper name I'd not encountered before, or a variant spelling of
"pfeffer" (as in "hasen-"). Since neither of these are really "English"
pronunciation at all, I have my doubts. If nobody has any better ideas,
when I record my dramatic reading of the poem to present to my nephew
and niece for Christmas, I may find a substitute word, just in case
they ask any questions. [He's almost 5, she's 2 1/2; I don't know that
they'll be all that fascinated. But I may as well try a little
subversion while I have the chance. ;-)]
-b
|
2285.73 | another typo | MAZE::FUSCI | DEC has it (on backorder) NOW! | Wed Sep 28 1994 18:28 | 4 |
| It's in my dictionary. Spelled feoffor or feoffer. Preferred
pronounciation does indeed rhyme with heifer. Means giver or grantor.
Ray
|