The optimal atmospheric density

On Oct 20, 6:20*pm, (Christian Weisgerber) wrote:

Brian Davis wrote:
If you think the most important part of language is making sure
it doesn't change, grow, or evolve... well, please go see the French.

That is bull^H^H^H^Ha myth.

I wasn't maintaining that the language isn't active or alive - just
that French seems to be one of the few other languages (besides
Autymn's version of English) where a group of people think they can
hammer to a stop (or at least a slow-down) and legislate the evolution
of language. In this, they seem to have a lot in common with Autymn.

The existence (and enforcement) of law to protect the French language
doesn't seem to be a myth. Perhaps you'd be happier if I said "please
go see the folks in Quebec"?

In fact, I'm willing to argue that French is currently evolving
more rapidly than English...

Maybe. Maybe not. You imply a comparison, and then only talk about
changes in *one* language... which doesn't exactly validate a
comparison.

* This is exciting, radical stuff.

I absolutely agree. Although I don't think it's exciting stuff to
Autymn, or the folks who try to implement the laws for the protection
of the French language.

--
Brian Davis

Brian Davis wrote:
On Oct 20, 6:20 pm, (Christian Weisgerber) wrote:
....
This is exciting, radical stuff.

I absolutely agree. Although I don't think it's exciting stuff to
Autymn, or the folks who try to implement the laws for the protection
of the French language.

You are giving Autumyn too much credit, while possibly at the same time
not quite enough credit.

His quasi-grammatical ravings (about grammar and other aspects of
language usage, while being difficult to decipher himself) seek to
dictate usage according to rules known only to himself, not to
grammarians generally. Possibly he should get some credit for the
creativity of his esoteric, idiosyncratic pedantry. We get cranks here
all the time with much less going for them upstairs.

On Oct 20, 3:11*am, Brian Davis wrote:
On Oct 18, 4:58*pm, "Autymn D. C." wrote:

I don't see any arguments under my posts.

Neither can we, which is why no one is engaging you.

So make some or go away.

Simply put, language is for communicating. The rest of us do it just
fine here... "poor" grammar, "poor" spelling, and all, Heck, we could

finely wrong

even do it in Rot13. Or as Yoda speaking, we can. If you think the

Who do Rot13?

most important part of language is making sure it doesn't change,
grow, or evolve... well, please go see the French. And for crying out

The Francs and their Francish/forwards (perverse)-Latin are why we're
in this mess: http://groups.google.com/group/rec.a...6fcc192953db52.
I thenk you mean the Hellènes' Catharevusa.

loud, at least pick a language to "defend" that has a consistent
internal logic.

What do you mean?

If you can make yourself understood by other easily - you are using
language correctly. If instead your best use of language is to try to
enforce rules that others don't understand... well, then at best you
are deluded as to how to communicate effectively. Which, seems to be
the case here.

Your Einglish is no more correct than Ebonics, whether you understand
or not. What don't you understand? Mine comes from dictionaries and
ætýmologhies, by which I came up with this list:
http://google.com/groups?q=%22Compar...+illiterate%22. One
word has one main meaning, and one staffer has one uttering. Any
other thouht and speech and mind shall be twisted and the world goes
to [melting] pot.

-Aut

On Oct 21, 7:02*am, Carey wrote:
His quasi-grammatical ravings (about grammar and other aspects of
language usage, while being difficult to decipher himself) seek to

There is no himself, you blind fag.

In article ,
(Christian Weisgerber) wrote:

* In syntax, French is moving toward polysynthetic verbs where all
those clitic pronouns and negation particles are becoming
incorporated into the verb, and what is traditionally analyzed
as dislocations and pronouns will eventually have to be treated
as freely movable subject and objects and a complex system of
verb prefixes that show multiple agreement:

le livre, je le lui donne, moi, à ton frère
= le livre jleluidonne moi à ton frère

Suddenly you are conjugating verbs so they show simultaneous
agreement with subject, direct object, and indirect object.

This is exciting, radical stuff.

I don't understand your example. Sounds to me (and I do speak French)
like it's just slightly compressed, no actual change in syntax or
structure. An actual *change* would to me be something like:

Je ne suis pas content.
= Chuis pas content.

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon

On Oct 21, 2:18*pm, Mike Ash wrote:
In article ,
(Christian Weisgerber) wrote:

* In syntax, French is moving toward polysynthetic verbs where all
* those clitic pronouns and negation particles are becoming
* incorporated into the verb, and what is traditionally analyzed
* as dislocations and pronouns will eventually have to be treated
* as freely movable subject and objects and a complex system of
* verb prefixes that show multiple agreement:

* * *le livre, je le lui donne, moi, à ton frère
* = le livre jleluidonne moi à ton frère

* Suddenly you are conjugating verbs so they show simultaneous
* agreement with subject, direct object, and indirect object.

* This is exciting, radical stuff.

I don't understand your example. Sounds to me (and I do speak French)
like it's just slightly compressed, no actual change in syntax or

http://google.com/groups?q=%22scient...arn+English%22

structure. An actual *change* would to me be something like:

* *Je ne suis pas content.
= Chuis pas content.

Francish is so whackt, so broken, so rotten, so corrupt, nearly
everything ends in "é" or "e". That's how the teens spell words: mé
apré cé pourré ke le cinoche se fermé...

-Aut

On Oct 21, 5:57*pm, "Autymn D. C." wrote:

-Aut

I think, properly, that's "Auté"

--
Brian Davis

This discussion, interesting and worthwhile as it may be in its own respect, seems to have disconnected itself fully from the original topic. It thus seems appropriate to respectfully remind my fellow newsgroup participants of the possiblity to change at least the subject line, if not the newsgroup, to something that more clearly hints at the current theme.

Carey wrote:
Brian Davis wrote:
On Oct 20, 6:20 pm, (Christian Weisgerber) wrote:
...
This is exciting, radical stuff.

I absolutely agree. Although I don't think it's exciting stuff to
Autymn, or the folks who try to implement the laws for the protection
of the French language.

You are giving Autumyn too much credit, while possibly at the same time
not quite enough credit.
[...]

--
Remove '_nospam' for actual email address.

This discussion, interesting and worthwhile as it may be in its own respect, seems to have disconnected itself fully from the original topic. It thus seems appropriate to respectfully remind my fellow newsgroup participants of the possibility to change at least the subject line, if not the newsgroup, to something that more clearly hints at the current theme.

Carey wrote:
Brian Davis wrote:
On Oct 20, 6:20 pm, (Christian Weisgerber) wrote:
...
This is exciting, radical stuff.

I absolutely agree. Although I don't think it's exciting stuff to
Autymn, or the folks who try to implement the laws for the protection
of the French language.

You are giving Autumyn too much credit, while possibly at the same time
not quite enough credit.
[...]

--
Remove '_nospam' for actual email address.

On Oct 21, 7:02*am, Carey wrote:
Brian Davis wrote:
On Oct 20, 6:20 pm, (Christian Weisgerber) wrote:
...
* This is exciting, radical stuff.

I absolutely agree. Although I don't think it's exciting stuff to
Autymn, or the folks who try to implement the laws for the protection
of the French language.

You are giving Autumyn too much credit, while possibly at the same time
not quite enough credit.

His quasi-grammatical ravings (about grammar and other aspects of
language usage, while being difficult to decipher himself) seek to
dictate usage according to rules known only to himself, not to
grammarians generally.

I feel it should be mentioned that Autymn claims to be a female.

Of course there is the caveat that much of his/her/its preferred
spellings/usages/meanings of various words do not coincide with those
in general usage...

Possibly he should get some credit for the
creativity of his esoteric, idiosyncratic pedantry. We get cranks here
all the time with much less going for them upstairs.

True dat.


Mark L. Fergerson