Re: Results in Parallel columns
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 17:06:02 +0300
Message-ID: <e76aoo$dos$1_at_nntp.aioe.org>
"Marshall" <marshall.spight_at_gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1150469629.683870.208860_at_i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> > Well, that might come from the fact that I've not studied English, my
> x wrote:
> > "Marshall" <marshall.spight_at_gmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:1150385707.530949.115490_at_g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
native
> > tongue is Novelian, I have been outside Novelia only one time for about
2
> > weeks, and I don't spend hours to carefuly translate each phrase I
write.
> This "Novelia" is a made-up name for a real place, yes?
It was suggested in a conversation with Hugh Darwen on ttm list. A translation of Roman from English to French and back to English came out as Novel.
>A place-name
> pseudonym the same way "x" is a person-name pseudonym.
So what. Those who are subscribers of ttm list know my real name by now.
In math, x is the first choice for the name of an unknown.
This is a theory group.
The e-mail address is fake 'cause I observed this is customary because of
spam.
not-exists seemed appropriate at that time because of 'database' in the name
of the NG.
> > You might have noticed I mostly use Latin loaned words and I don't use a
> > spell checker.
> I've noticed you're not a native speaker of English,but I haven't seen
> that you've any particular difficulty getting your ideas across.
> Whether those ideas make sense is another matter ... :-)
Across what ? Across the Styx ? Make sense to whom ?
> > I also have some trouble sometimes understanding some of your (pl.)
> > allusions.
> Ah, well, I am guilty of that, certainly. My alusions tend to be either
> of 19th century events or literature, or else 21st century late night
> cartoons. (Two of my interests outside of data management.)
0:15/1 o'clock cartoons from monday to thursday here in Novelia.
> Not a good way to make onesself understood internationally,
> I suppose.
Indeed. Especially because they are alusions and you don't care about this
"internationally" thing maybe. After all this is an English NG.
> > Someone asked how he can check if two databases are syncronized after
> > syncronization or something like that.
> > I said the databases will be syncronized.(explanation: No need to check.
If
> > they weren't, that was not syncronization.)
> > Is that cryptic ? Opaque ? Obvious ?
> All of those, in order.
>At first it is cryptic, because without explanation it seems obviously
false.
That might be because an incorrect use of tenses in English. A simple question would have cleared that.
>Then if one decides to try to find a meaning,
> in becomes opaque, or "hard to understand."
> Then when one stumbles upon what you meant, it is obvious.
<dict>
ob-vi-ous (ob'vee uhs) adj.
I ask again. What "obvious" means to you ?
> > Someone complained that I'm not subtle (or something like that), that
I'm
> > obvious, that I'm dull or veiled. You say I'm opaque and fine.
> So clearly there is some semantic issue; there is only disagreement
> as to what specifically it is.
> > [...]
> > 4. hard to understand; not clear or lucid.
> > [...]
>
> > See how difficult it is ?
> I recognize there are challenges and ambiguities in natural language,
> but that's not what I'm talking about.
I have no ideea of what you are talking about. I have little time to spend it writing pages when short phrases will due. I also tend to write short sentences for the reason that I not master English language to a level where I can afford start writting lengthy prose or poetry in it.
About the "lucid", a man have to drink once in a while. Take Bender for example. Received on Mon Jun 19 2006 - 16:06:02 CEST