stop or not

"Matt Probert" <comments (AT) probertencyclopaedia (DOT) com> wrote

Indeed, some of us who still cling to the notion of correct English do
still use &c.

I'm in two minds about this... On the one hand, I feel similar and want to
preserve the language from the yobs and the yanks, but on the other hand,
the English Language is a living entity and it is continually evolving,
therefore the 'notion of correct English' might legitimately mean different
things to different people.

I can argue it both ways, and frequently do, depending on what mood I am in.

CJM

CJM wrote

"Matt Probert" <comments (AT) probertencyclopaedia (DOT) com> wrote in message
news:439717e4.122763796 (AT) news (DOT) ntlworld.com...

Indeed, some of us who still cling to the notion of correct English
do still use &c.


I'm in two minds about this... On the one hand, I feel similar and
want to preserve the language from the yobs and the yanks, but on the
other hand, the English Language is a living entity and it is
continually evolving, therefore the 'notion of correct English' might
legitimately mean different things to different people.

I can argue it both ways, and frequently do, depending on what mood I
am in.

Agree. If we all spoke "proper" english, without letting it evolve,
we'd all be talking like Shakespeare!

--
Charles Sweeney
http://CharlesSweeney.com

On Thu, 8 Dec 2005 10:16:54 -0000, "CJM"
<cjmnew04 (AT) REMOVEMEyahoo (DOT) co.uk> wrote:

"Matt Probert" <comments (AT) probertencyclopaedia (DOT) com> wrote in message
news:439717e4.122763796 (AT) news (DOT) ntlworld.com...

Indeed, some of us who still cling to the notion of correct English do
still use &c.


I'm in two minds about this... On the one hand, I feel similar and want to
preserve the language from the yobs and the yanks, but on the other hand,
the English Language is a living entity and it is continually evolving,
therefore the 'notion of correct English' might legitimately mean different
things to different people.

I agree. For example, take dialects. As you will be aware, the British
Isles has a rich diversity of unintelligible dialects (and even a few
languages, Dorsetshire, Cornish, Welsh, Scottish and English spring to
mind).

Dialects are perfectly valid. For speaking. But not for writing. Which
leads many of us to object to chldren being forced to "speak proper"
when in fact they already are speaking quite properly with their "aye
up lad!" or "Gor blimey! Feast yer mincers on those Bristols!"

The language is alive. And evolving. However, the use of "&c." is not
properly evolving. An evolving language is the introduction of new
words, like "technophobia" for example, and the disuse of older
archaic terms, or even words taking on new meanings, such as "gay" in
recent years.

Yes I accept that the term "correct English" is rather loose and
woolly. Perhaps best restricted to use in Yankee bashing <g>

Matt


--
The Probert Encyclopaedia - Beyond Britannica
http://www.probertencyclopaedia.com

In article <op.s1baburdm9g4qz-wnt (AT) tbdata (DOT) com>, SpamBlocked (AT) tbdata (DOT) com says...

Greetings One and All

Been musing recently about screen-readers and their interpretation of text.

How do they cope with full-stops (periods) used to signify an abbreviation?

For example: etc.

Do the period marks assist or are they a hindrance?

Thanks for reading.

Screen readers try to use a degree of context: in other words - where is the fullstop in
relation to other text. Dictionaries help in this process. Users can select various
ways in which the software behaves, depending on the activity. For instance: for
straight reading, I don't want to hear any punctuation, but when proof reding (even this
follow-up) I do want to be sure that the punctuation is as I intend. Usually arowing
through the text with varying degrees of specificity - I.e. - line, word, character etc,
the fullstop will be read correctly. But reading this posting without proof reading it,
it won't be read. I am using Window-Eyes which in my view is more intelligent with
respect to fullstops and other punctuation, but that probably gets me into a flame war
(which we have not had for a while.)



Regards

Vaughan.

In article <op.s1bcpqsfm9g4qz-wnt (AT) tbdata (DOT) com>, SpamBlocked (AT) tbdata (DOT) com says...

Writing in
news:alt.http://www.webmaster,alt.comp.blind-...-accessibility
From the safety of the http://groups.google.com cafeteria
Chaddy2222 <rockradio2000 (AT) yahoo (DOT) com.au> said:

Wiliam...
Can you give us some sort of an example of what you are talking about.
If it is the situation where you use a range / group of full stops that
you are refering to..
Then yes. There is some times some slight disruption in the overall
flow of the text...

Consider this sentence: "The admin had several housekeeping chores to
attend to, checking backup logs etc. before he could leave for the night."

The question is: how does a screen-reader interpret the period mark at the
end of "etc."? and would it the visitor be better served if the period
were omitted?

William: can you configure your newsreader properly as you seem to have reply-to and
follow-up confused. Follow-up is the groups you wish to post to and to which public
responses are sent unless someone else changes this header, and reply-to is often used as
an email address. Not an expert in these things, but I know when they start to become
annoying.

Apart from the irritation this is causing, maybe you could explain why you are
interested? And no: the fullstop should never be omitted.



Vaughan.

Deciding to do something for the good of humanity, Vaughan Dodd
<nosupport (AT) bat (DOT) corporation.com> spouted in
alt.http://www.webmaster,alt.comp.blind-...accessibility:

William: can you configure your newsreader properly as you seem to have reply-to and
follow-up confused.

Doesn't look like it to me. He didn't set a follow-up (which he should
have IMHO, posting to multiple groups, but that's a different matter),
and his reply-to is "usenet" - IOW, he doesn't *want* to receive email
replies.

Not an expert in these things, but I know when they start to become
annoying.

Well, while we're complaining about annoying newsreader configuration,
can you please configure yours to wrap lines at a reasonable length? In
general a line length of between 70 and 80 characters is considered
acceptable, with around 76 characters being the norm. OTOH, yours
currently seems to be set to about 90.

--
Mark Parnell
================================================== ===
Att. Google Groups users - this is your last warning:
http://www.safalra.com/special/googlegroupsreply/

Writing in
news:alt.http://www.webmaster,alt.comp.blind-...-accessibility
From the safety of the Bat Corporation cafeteria
Vaughan Dodd <nosupport (AT) bat (DOT) corporation.com> said:

In article <op.s1bcpqsfm9g4qz-wnt (AT) tbdata (DOT) com>, SpamBlocked (AT) tbdata (DOT) com
says...
...
The question is: how does a screen-reader interpret the period mark at
the
end of "etc."? and would it the visitor be better served if the period
were omitted?

...
maybe you could explain why you are
interested?

simply because (among other things) I am a site builder.

And no: the fullstop should never be omitted.

thanks - that was my instinct but it's good to hear from users of screen
readers.

--
William Tasso

Save the drama
for your Mama.

Writing in
news:alt.http://www.webmaster,alt.comp.blind-...-accessibility
From the safety of the cafeteria
Mark Parnell <webmaster (AT) clarkecomputers (DOT) com.au> said:

[follow ups rearranged]

Deciding to do something for the good of humanity, Vaughan Dodd
nosupport (AT) bat (DOT) corporation.com> spouted in
alt.http://www.webmaster,alt.comp.blind-...accessibility:

William: can you configure your newsreader properly as you seem to have
reply-to and
follow-up confused.

Doesn't look like it to me. He didn't set a follow-up (which he should
have IMHO, posting to multiple groups, but that's a different matter),

indeed it is - and whether one sets the follow-up header or not depends
entirely on the nature of the post /and/ the expected
audience/contributors.

and his reply-to is "usenet" - IOW, he doesn't *want* to receive email
replies.

precicely

--
William Tasso

Save the drama
for your Mama.