On Thursday 05 April 2012 03:20:50 Scott Ferguson wrote:
> layout style (lots of white space, short paragraphs) also plays a large
> part in accessibility and allowing comprehension.
That is very helpful for the partially sighted too, in addition to those who
might find the comprehension difficul
On 2012-04-05, Dotan Cohen wrote:
> civil conversation. You obviously have much experience, and I find
> that weathering your insults is worth the knowledge that I gain from
> interacting with you. That is an underhanded compliment, by the way.
Underhanded or left-handed?
(Don't answer that; le
On Thu, 05 Apr 2012 13:28:27 +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 5. April 2012 schrieb Camaleón:
(...)
>> > I am certainly tempted to make a screenshot of the view of this
>> > thread here in KMail, upload it somewhere and put a link here.
>>
>> No need for all that work. You can
Am Donnerstag, 5. April 2012 schrieb Camaleón:
> On Wed, 04 Apr 2012 19:55:47 +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> > Am Mittwoch, 4. April 2012 schrieb Camaleón:
> >> On Tue, 03 Apr 2012 23:20:10 +0200, Tony van der Hoff wrote:
> >> > On 03/04/12 19:21, Camaleón wrote:
> >> (...)
> >>
> >> >>> "Ulte
On Wed, 04 Apr 2012 19:55:47 +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 4. April 2012 schrieb Camaleón:
>> On Tue, 03 Apr 2012 23:20:10 +0200, Tony van der Hoff wrote:
>> > On 03/04/12 19:21, Camaleón wrote:
>> (...)
>>
>> >>> "Ulterior" is certainly not a synonym for "posterior",
>> >>
>>
On Thursday 05 April 2012 01:04:36 Cybe R. Wizard wrote:
> On-list or off, your method is as he has described it. If your wish is
> to not engage in either argument or discussion then.. don't engage.
Yes, I did allow him to provoke me. And yes, I should not have done so.
> Indeed, it seems t
On 05/04/12 06:07, Dotan Cohen wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 10:21, Lisi wrote:
>> On Wednesday 04 April 2012 14:41:48 you wrote:
>>> Colloquial English is liberal to change,
Yes. I understand what you mean. And that's a classic example of
something written by some for whom English is not their
On Thu, 5 Apr 2012 00:00:02 +0100
Lisi wrote:
> On Wednesday 04 April 2012 21:36:39 Cybe R. Wizard wrote:
> > > Another personal attack, putting words in my mouth (I never said
> > > that I was perfect) and then refuting them. I believe that there
> > > is a term for that. Like your ad hominem at
On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 18:56, Lisi wrote:
> Dotan - this was sent to you off-list when you wrote to me off-list, to try
> and preempt one of your interminable off-list bullying threads.
I had noticed that at some point some of the messages had gone
off-list, so I put them back on list when I noti
On Wednesday 04 April 2012 21:36:39 Cybe R. Wizard wrote:
> > Another personal attack, putting words in my mouth (I never said that
> > I was perfect) and then refuting them. I believe that there is a term
> > for that. Like your ad hominem attack above, that is a sign of one who
> > is loosing an
Dotan - this was sent to you off-list when you wrote to me off-list, to try
and preempt one of your interminable off-list bullying threads. If you don't
remember doing that to me, then you have a very short memory.
On Wednesday 04 April 2012 21:07:35 Dotan Cohen wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at
On Wednesday 04 April 2012 18:55:47 Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> I might try whether KMail handles ignoring this thread. It sometimes seems
> to work at other times mails in the thread are still marked as new.
You are a human being with freedom of action. If you want not to read this
thread, don'
On Wed, 4 Apr 2012 16:07:35 -0400
Dotan Cohen wrote:
> Another personal attack, putting words in my mouth (I never said that
> I was perfect) and then refuting them. I believe that there is a term
> for that. Like your ad hominem attack above, that is a sign of one who
> is loosing an argument.
On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 10:21, Lisi wrote:
> On Wednesday 04 April 2012 14:41:48 you wrote:
>> Colloquial English is liberal to change, but software manuals should
>> not be written in colloquial English. There is a more professional
>> language that should be used in manuals.
>
> You are being del
Am Mittwoch, 4. April 2012 schrieb Camaleón:
> On Tue, 03 Apr 2012 23:20:10 +0200, Tony van der Hoff wrote:
> > On 03/04/12 19:21, Camaleón wrote:
> (...)
>
> >>> "Ulterior" is certainly not a synonym for "posterior",
> >>
> >> But it was, that's what I meant. It's not a term I would neither use
On Tuesday 03 April 2012 22:09:15 Dotan Cohen wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 16:21, Lisi wrote:
> > On Tuesday 03 April 2012 20:36:07 consultores wrote:
> >> The other point, is that native speaker, does not mean "excellence"; it
> >> only mean that this person just speaks one dialect/language fr
On Tue, 03 Apr 2012 23:20:10 +0200, Tony van der Hoff wrote:
> On 03/04/12 19:21, Camaleón wrote:
(...)
>>> "Ulterior" is certainly not a synonym for "posterior",
>>
>> But it was, that's what I meant. It's not a term I would neither use in
>> my own language but it is still perfectly correct.
>
On Tue, 03 Apr 2012 11:14:55 -0700, John Jason Jordan wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Apr 2012 15:41:20 + (UTC) Camaleón
> dijo:
>
>>But the above does not imply that using "posterior" in the above stanza
>>is wrong. It can be improved (we are not writers not editors) but not
>>incorrect. Those "old Lati
On Wednesday 04 April 2012 01:53:37 consultores wrote:
> On 04/03/2012 02:38 PM, Lisi wrote:
> > On Tuesday 03 April 2012 22:04:24 consultores wrote:
> When I took the French Bac., the criterion laid down for the aural
> English
> exam was that marks would be awarded for speaking as
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 16:21, Lisi wrote:
> On Tuesday 03 April 2012 20:36:07 consultores wrote:
>> The other point, is that native speaker, does not mean "excellence"; it
>> only mean that this person just speaks one dialect/language from the
>> begining of his life!
>
> But in many, if not most,
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 10:50, Russell L. Harris
> Commonly-used English terms which are
apropos to this matter are
> "precede", "predecessor", "succeed", "successor", "antecedent", and
> "descendant". Thus, one could say:
>
> "Lenny preceded Squeeze."
>
> or
>
> "Squeeze succeeds Lenny."
>
>
>> Squeeze and Lenny. Maybe OK in some other European language, but not
>> in English.
>> . . For named releases of software and to express a relationship in
>> time,
>> posterior is the wrong word in English.
>>
>> Since the thread seemed mainly about corre
On 04/03/2012 02:38 PM, Lisi wrote:
On Tuesday 03 April 2012 22:04:24 consultores wrote:
When I took the French Bac., the criterion laid down for the aural
English
exam was that marks would be awarded for speaking as would a native
speaker,
explicitly in preference to the "correct" usage.
Here,
On 03/04/12 19:21, Camaleón wrote:
On Tue, 03 Apr 2012 18:39:03 +0200, Tony van der Hoff wrote:
In this post, "indicated for" is probably the wrong term for the
context. It roughly means "prescribed". It is unclear what you really
mean, but I would guess "capable of".
Mmm... yes.
How about
On Tuesday 03 April 2012 22:04:24 consultores wrote:
> >> When I took the French Bac., the criterion laid down for the aural
> >> English
> >> exam was that marks would be awarded for speaking as would a native
> >> speaker,
> >> explicitly in preference to the "correct" usage.
>
> Here, i only can
On 04/03/2012 01:28 PM, Doug wrote:
On 04/03/2012 04:21 PM, Lisi wrote:
On Tuesday 03 April 2012 20:36:07 consultores wrote:
The other point, is that native speaker, does not mean "excellence"; it
only mean that this person just speaks one dialect/language from the
begining of his life!
But in
On 04/03/2012 04:21 PM, Lisi wrote:
On Tuesday 03 April 2012 20:36:07 consultores wrote:
The other point, is that native speaker, does not mean "excellence"; it
only mean that this person just speaks one dialect/language from the
begining of his life!
But in many, if not most, cases, has also b
On Tuesday 03 April 2012 20:36:07 consultores wrote:
> The other point, is that native speaker, does not mean "excellence"; it
> only mean that this person just speaks one dialect/language from the
> begining of his life!
But in many, if not most, cases, has also been educated in it. And native
On 03/04/12 21:36, consultores wrote:
On 04/03/2012 09:05 AM, Indulekha wrote:
you wrote:
On Tue, 3 Apr 2012 05:29:56 -0500
Indulekha wrote:
Are all these distionnaries wrong?
There is nothing wrong with your English or those definitions,
they're just obscure and have fallen out of popular u
On 04/03/2012 09:05 AM, Indulekha wrote:
you wrote:
On Tue, 3 Apr 2012 05:29:56 -0500
Indulekha wrote:
Are all these distionnaries wrong?
There is nothing wrong with your English or those definitions,
they're just obscure and have fallen out of popular usage. I've
frequently observed that pe
On Tue, 3 Apr 2012 15:41:20 + (UTC)
Camaleón dijo:
>But the above does not imply that using "posterior" in the above
>stanza is wrong. It can be improved (we are not writers not editors)
>but not incorrect. Those "old Latin" lovers (me included :-P) would
>even use the term "ulterior" for the
On Tue, 03 Apr 2012 18:39:03 +0200, Tony van der Hoff wrote:
> On 03/04/12 17:41, Camaleón wrote:
>> On Tue, 03 Apr 2012 14:50:07 +, Russell L. Harris wrote:
>>
>> (careful when quoting...)
>>
>>> * Camaleón [120403 13:51]:
On Tue, 03 Apr 2012 05:29:56 -0500, Indulekha wrote:
>
On Tuesday 03 April 2012 15:58:45 Kelly Clowers wrote:
> >> In general there is a tendency in modern American English to
> >> use rather simple words or descriptive phrases made of simple
> >> words rather than a single very precise but less well known word.
> >
> > Again, is that specific to Amer
On 03/04/12 17:41, Camaleón wrote:
On Tue, 03 Apr 2012 14:50:07 +, Russell L. Harris wrote:
(careful when quoting...)
* Camaleón [120403 13:51]:
On Tue, 03 Apr 2012 05:29:56 -0500, Indulekha wrote:
In linux.debian.user, you wrote:
On Mon, 2 Apr 2012, Paul E Condon wrote:
As far
On Tuesday 03 April 2012 15:42:13 Mihamina Rakotomandimby wrote:
> On 04/03/2012 05:38 PM, Lisi wrote:
> >> > Then, for people whose native language is not English, in some
> >> > cases the only way to find the right word seems to be try and error.
> >
> > Or accept the word of educated native
you wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Apr 2012 05:29:56 -0500
> Indulekha wrote:
>> >
>> > Are all these distionnaries wrong?
>> >
>>
>> There is nothing wrong with your English or those definitions,
>> they're just obscure and have fallen out of popular usage. I've
>> frequently observed that people for whom
On Tue, 03 Apr 2012 14:50:07 +, Russell L. Harris wrote:
(careful when quoting...)
> * Camaleón [120403 13:51]:
>> On Tue, 03 Apr 2012 05:29:56 -0500, Indulekha wrote:
>>
>> > In linux.debian.user, you wrote:
>>
>> >> On Mon, 2 Apr 2012, Paul E Condon wrote:
>> >>
>> As far as I kno
On Tue, 3 Apr 2012 05:29:56 -0500
Indulekha wrote:
> >
> > Are all these distionnaries wrong?
> >
> > --
> > Pierre Frenkiel
> > ---1463809023-1608600801-1333448123=:30347--
> >
>
> There is nothing wrong with your English or those definitions,
> they're just obscure and have fallen out of popu
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 07:09, Pierre Frenkiel wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Apr 2012, Kelly Clowers wrote:
>
>> They are not wrong per say, but only the first definition you mention
>> (anatomy) is in widespread use these days (which is why it said
>> "chiefly").
>
> Is that specific to American English, or
* Camaleón [120403 13:51]:
> On Tue, 03 Apr 2012 05:29:56 -0500, Indulekha wrote:
>
> > In linux.debian.user, you wrote:
>
> >> On Mon, 2 Apr 2012, Paul E Condon wrote:
> >>
> As far as I know, Squeeze is posterior to Lenny, and the
> recommended
Commonly-used English terms which
On Tuesday 03 April 2012 11:29:56 Indulekha wrote:
> I've
> frequently observed that people for whom English is a second
> language are more literate that the average American.
Yes, but their English is noy as good.
Words that have fallen out of use cannot just be used in their obsolete
meanings
On 04/03/2012 05:38 PM, Lisi wrote:
> Then, for people whose native language is not English, in some cases
> the only way to find the right word seems to be try and error.
Or accept the word of educated native speakers.
[I'm non native english]
It's hard to convince someone with "S
On Tuesday 03 April 2012 15:09:50 Pierre Frenkiel wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Apr 2012, Kelly Clowers wrote:
> > They are not wrong per say, but only the first definition you mention
> > (anatomy) is in widespread use these days (which is why it said
> > "chiefly").
>
>Is that specific to American Engli
On Tue, 3 Apr 2012, Kelly Clowers wrote:
They are not wrong per say, but only the first definition you mention
(anatomy) is in widespread use these days (which is why it said
"chiefly").
Is that specific to American English, or is it also true for
British English, Canadian English, ...?
P
lationship in time,
>>> posterior is the wrong word in English.
>>>
>>> Since the thread seemed mainly about correct English usage, I thought
>>> it would be helpful to point this out before the word got incorporated
>>> into Debian documentation.
>>
&
nglish to describe the relation between
>> Squeeze and Lenny. Maybe OK in some other European language, but not
>> in English.
>> . . For named releases of software and to express a relationship in time,
>> posterior is the wrong word in English.
>>
>> Since the thread
be the relation between
>> Squeeze and Lenny. Maybe OK in some other European language, but not
>> in English.
>> . .
>> For named releases of software and to express a relationship in time,
>> posterior is the wrong word in English.
>>
>> Since the thre
English.
. .
For named releases of software and to express a relationship in time,
posterior is the wrong word in English.
Since the thread seemed mainly about correct English usage, I thought
it would be helpful to point this out before the word got incorporated
into Debian documentation.
I
48 matches
Mail list logo
