From: Nick on
"Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim(a)verizon.net> writes:

> On Mar 1, 2:59 am, Nick <3-nos...(a)temporary-address.org.uk> wrote:
>> "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...(a)verizon.net> writes:
>>
>> > "State" is not a useful term for 'nation-state' because it is serving
>> > a different, much more salient function not only in the US, but also
>> > in (at least) Mexico and Brazil, and I think Germany.
>>
>> So are you suggesting that "failed state" and "rogue state" are
>> expressions that have no meaning in the US.
>
> No, thre is a difference between a bare noun and a qualified noun. Did
> you not see that I used "nation-state" above?

So "state" doesn't mean US state when qualified with - oh how about
"Pacific". OK that's perfectly clear.

<pepperpot>There, I've run rings around you logically</pepperpot>
--
Online waterways route planner | http://canalplan.eu
Plan trips, see photos, check facilities | http://canalplan.org.uk
From: Mike Lyle on
Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> On Mar 1, 8:35 am, tony cooper <tony_cooper...(a)earthlink.net> wrote:
>> On Mon, 1 Mar 2010 04:51:09 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> <gramma...(a)verizon.net> wrote:
>>>>> Don't be ridiculous. Washington's Birthday is February 22
>>>>> (Gregorian), and Presidents' Day was observed on Feburary 15.
>>
>>>> Your foot's bleeding again. Have the bullet removed before the
>>>> wound festers.
>>
>>>> Washington's Birthday was officially shifted to the third Monday in
>>>> February by the Uniform Monday Holiday Act in 1971. The federal
>>>> holiday has never officially been changed to President's Day.
>>
>>>> The change was made 39 years ago. You've never noticed?
>>
>>> In some states, we think Lincoln was pretty important, too.
>>
>>> We note that you moved to a part of the country where Lincoln is
>>> despised.
>>
>> If there's an anti-Lincoln sentiment in Florida I'm not aware of it.
>> To be honest about it - and I should be when Abe is involved -
>> Lincoln really isn't the subject of many conversations around here.
>
> That says something right there.
>
>> Is your "We" an insular "We" or a Royal "We"? For what group do you
>> speak? New Yorkers, linguists, or generally-considered-to-be-potty
>> cross-posters?
>
> If you have so much trouble interpreting simple English, why do you
> hang around a.u.e.?
>
> The "we" are the residents of New York and Illinois.

Perhaps "generally-considered-to-be-potty
cross-posters" goes without saying.

--
Mike.


From: Adam Funk on
On 2010-03-01, Hatunen wrote:

> On Mon, 1 Mar 2010 16:16:10 +1300, "PaulJK"
><paul.kriha(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote:
>
>>Hatunen wrote:

>>> When mentioning temperatures I always try to remember to use "C"
>>> or "F".
>>
>>Don't forget "R" and "K" !
>
> I, for one, make very few posts requiring either.

I don't think I've every seen an R or K thermometer (except in
books).


--
"Mrs CJ and I avoid clichés like the plague."
From: Peter T. Daniels on
On Mar 1, 2:10 pm, Nick <3-nos...(a)temporary-address.org.uk> wrote:
> "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...(a)verizon.net> writes:
>
> > On Mar 1, 2:59 am, Nick <3-nos...(a)temporary-address.org.uk> wrote:
> >> "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...(a)verizon.net> writes:
>
> >> > "State" is not a useful term for 'nation-state' because it is serving
> >> > a different, much more salient function not only in the US, but also
> >> > in (at least) Mexico and Brazil, and I think Germany.
>
> >> So are you suggesting that "failed state" and "rogue state" are
> >> expressions that have no meaning in the US.
>
> > No, there is a difference between a bare noun and a qualified noun. Did
> > you not see that I used "nation-state" above?
>
> So "state" doesn't mean US state when qualified with - oh how about
> "Pacific".  OK that's perfectly clear.

Wait a minute, you're posting from one of the mathematical groups and
you don't even understand first-year logic?

Don't you know the difference between converses and inverses versus
contrapositives?

> <pepperpot>There, I've run rings around you logically</pepperpot>
From: Peter T. Daniels on
On Mar 1, 11:48 am, Hatunen <hatu...(a)cox.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Feb 2010 20:23:39 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"
> <gramma...(a)verizon.net> wrote:
> >On Feb 28, 9:50 pm, "PaulJK" <paul.kr...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote:
> >> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >> > On Feb 28, 1:42 am, "PaulJK" <paul.kr...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote:
> >> >> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >> >>> On Feb 26, 1:40 am, "PaulJK" <paul.kr...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote:
> >> >>>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
> >> >>>>> Do the Pacific states get the same coverage we do?
>
> >> >>>> Ignoring the various pay, satellite, and cable channels, there
> >> >>>> are about twelve free-to-air locally broadcast channels.
> >> >>>> One of the free-to-air channels (Prime) broadcasts Winter
> >> >>>> Olympics every day nonstop from 5:30am to 6:30pm. Looking
> >> >>>> at today's Friday schedule, apart from the half-hour WO news
> >> >>>> at 5:30am and Cross Country skiing at 10:30-11:30am all the
> >> >>>> events are live.
>
> >> >>>> If by "same coverage" you mean "identical programming" then
> >> >>>> the answer is no. All commentators are either New Zealanders
> >> >>>> or people who are aware of commenting for the downunder
> >> >>>> or specifically kiwi audience. Now and then they interrupt
> >> >>>> the program to switch to another competition to show
> >> >>>> a kiwi athlete, who would we normally not see, perform
> >> >>>> their shtick and then switch back.
>
> >> >>> Eh? You take "Pacific states" -- in the context of time zones -- to
> >> >>> include New Zealand??
>
> >> >> Whoops, sorry, I didn't realise that by "Pacific states" you meant
> >> >> "US Pacific states".
>
> >> > We very, very, very rarely use "state" to mean 'independent nation'.
>
> >> And we very, very, very rarely use the expression "Pacific states"
> >> which would exclude the majority of Pacific states (i.e. non-US
> >> states in the Pacific).
>
> >"Pacific states" is a wel-established term -- sometimes it includes AK
> >and HI, sometimes not.
>
> >> This just shows that no matter how hard I try I still sometimes
> >> fail to correctly translate Merkin E. semantics to English E.
>
> >"State" is not a useful term for 'nation-state' because it is serving
> >a different, much more salient function not only in the US, but also
> >in (at least) Mexico and Brazil, and I think Germany.
>
> Germany doesn't have states, it has laender.

Which, in English, are called states. In preparation for my invited-
lecture visit at the beginning of April, I'm looking at websites and
today picked out a guidebook (ended up with Michelin), and they use
"state."