Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: lucasea on 5 Oct 2006 19:15 "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote in message news:p62dnVv9ou9UFbjYRVnyig(a)pipex.net... > <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote in message > news:r3fVg.8959$GR.3051(a)newssvr29.news.prodigy.net... >> >> >> Not sure about spelling, but I've read some very well-researched serious >> scholarly linguistic articles that say that the British English accent at >> the time of the American colonies was very much closer to the current New >> England accent than to the current variety of British accents. It seems >> speech in the "colonies" was and is much more conservative than speech in >> the mother land. I don't remember what their evidence was, there are >> obviously no audio tapes to compare. > > It has the potential (and that dreaded "ring of truth") however the > reality is possibly very, very far from the case. > > Both sets of languages have had an equal time to "evolve" into their > current form. The US has been much more influenced by immigrant > linguistics over that period than England has, so I am inclined to doubt > the validity of the claim. > > I suspect both languages are equally distant from the English spoken in > (say) 1775. Yeah, I know, those were all *exactly* the same response I had when I first heard the thesis. But I do remember that the evidence was convincing. Dammit all, I wish I could remember where I read/saw that. I don't expect you to take my word for it, but to me, it really was more convincing than I've managed to convey. >> Some linguists even interpret the shifts in England as related to >> blueblood Londoners putting on airs, and that accent subsequently >> catching on in other parts of the country. I suspect this last part is a >> bit of a stretch, but the whole thing is an interesting thesis. I find >> it fascinating to think about how people spoke in the past, and how >> language has evolved. Puts a whole new perspective in the various new >> inner-city lexicons and pronunciations that have developed, even in my >> lifetime. > > Languages evolve all the time. Welsh is a good example. Yep, that's what I find so fascinating. So, did Welsh get all the extra consonants that would otherwise have gone with the vowels ("u") you English stole? :^) Eric Lucas
From: T Wake on 5 Oct 2006 19:16 "John Fields" <jfields(a)austininstruments.com> wrote in message news:q23bi21n7lmr88rj37gl5e2e1dq6dd11r0(a)4ax.com... > On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 22:54:36 +0100, "T Wake" > <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote: > >> >>"John Fields" <jfields(a)austininstruments.com> wrote in message >>news:i0a8i2hadjh1gfqs84iur3qj96t71fevm9(a)4ax.com... >>> On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 16:29:32 -0500, John Fields >>> <jfields(a)austininstruments.com> wrote: >>> >>>>On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 00:42:54 +0100, Eeyore >>>><rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Homer J Simpson wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote >>>>>> >>>>>> > Alternatively you could put every mosque under armed guard and >>>>>> > provide >>>>>> > them with no end of support.... :-) >>>>>> >>>>>> Or move them all to the Outer Hebrides - and the Muslims with them! >>>>> >>>>>With such a wide selection to choose from, I often wonder why we have >>>>>no >>>>>prison islands. >>>> >>>>--- >>>>You do. It's called Australia. >>>> >>>>>You could make the prisoners actually work the land and stuff. >>>>>You never know, it might do them good. >>>> >>>>--- >>>>They certainly seem to be doing better than you lot, lately. >>> >>> --- >>> P.S. One Australian friend of mine says he'll be eternally grateful >>> to you for giving them Heaven and keeping Hell for yourselves. >>> >> >>Glad to hear it. >> >>They have the rough end of the deal though - the sensible ones moved to >>New >>Zealand. > > --- > I've never been there, but I'd like to go. Same here. If they would have me I would emigrate but I suspect I am too old and not rich enough for them now :-) > Everything about it seems beautiful. Yes. And much nicer people than the Australians..... :-D
From: Eeyore on 5 Oct 2006 19:16 "Michael A. Terrell" wrote: > Unemployed? Does 100% medical disability after a lifetime of had work > qualify? In the USA I think it means totally stuffed. Graham
From: T Wake on 5 Oct 2006 19:17 "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message news:452591D5.FB8EC504(a)earthlink.net... >T Wake wrote: >> >> <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote in message >> news:TpfVg.8964$GR.4115(a)newssvr29.news.prodigy.net... >> > >> > "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote in message >> > news:z8KdnXZUI_tF5rjYRVny2Q(a)pipex.net... >> >> >> >> <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote in message >> >> news:_kdVg.8930$GR.1926(a)newssvr29.news.prodigy.net... >> >>> >> >>> "Keith" <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote in message >> >>> news:MPG.1f8ef7a64499f172989d95(a)News.Individual.NET... >> >> >> >>>> Nope. not good enough. If the call is suspect it can't wait a >> >>>> "certain number of hours". The value is gone by the time they can >> >>>> call a FISA judge. >> >>> >> >>> No, nice try at a strawman, but it has nothing to do with what I'm >> >>> saying and what is provided for in FISA. >> >> >> >> Strawman or not, the time sensitive nature of the intelligence still >> >> is >> >> not a strong enough argument for most cases. >> > >> > You better believe it is in this case. >> >> Why? >> >> What situation can the intelligence be so vital that the law enforcement >> agency know it is going to be said but dont have time to advance request >> a >> warrant? >> >> > However, it's provided for in FISA. >> >> Not really relevant to me, as your country feels it can intercept my >> communications at its leisure. > > > Then don't call anyone in the United States. > I don't have to. Your country can intercept other nations to gather foreign intelligence.
From: T Wake on 5 Oct 2006 19:17
"Homer J Simpson" <nobody(a)nowhere.com> wrote in message news:ZjgVg.51693$E67.43841(a)clgrps13... > > "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote in message > news:3vudnaMhu8Q2EbjYnZ2dnUVZ8qWdnZ2d(a)pipex.net... > >> God Bless Fundamentalists..... > > Stupid ideas appeal to stupid people. > Sadly true. It is a shame that stupid also tends to equate to vocal. |