From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V9 #182 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Friday, July 7 2000 Volume 09 : Number 182 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: "you must relate to the earthling mortal!" [overbury@cn.ca] Re: a new home [lj lindhurst ] Happy 4th (100% UFO content) ["Randy R." ] o quebec! o canada! part 329 [tim fuller and randi spiegel ] "Vive le Rhode Island libre!" [tim fuller and randi spiegel ] Re: fegmaniax-digest V9 #181 [digja611@student.otago.ac.nz] Yoo-Foes ["jbranscombe@compuserve.com" ] Astounding tune similarity [Michael R Godwin ] Fwd: Re: Linguistic question [basil@naxs.com (Brad Hutchinson)] Re: o quebec! o canada! part 329 [Michael R Godwin ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2000 09:03:50 -0400 From: overbury@cn.ca Subject: Re: "you must relate to the earthling mortal!" M. Godwin: > > On Wed, 5 Jul 2000, Natalie Jacobs wrote: > > n., who once pissed off her parents by buying a Quebecois flag and > > waving it out the car window screaming "Free Quebec!" during a trip > > through Ontario > > I think you mean "Vive le Quebec libre!" > Of course she didn't! Everybody knows that Quebec's nationalism is territorial, not ethnic. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2000 11:55:19 -0400 From: lj lindhurst Subject: Re: a new home >good afternoon, >if you link to my site (don't laugh -- a few people do!), or if you >bookmark my site (don't laugh -- at least one person must!), be it >noted that you no longer have to look at those nasty, dirty >advertisements. > >the site is now located at . Okay, Eddie, I must again pose the question: WILL YOU MARRY ME?? sorry Quail...you just have too many rodents. l p.s., the gerbils have had an exciting night! Check out their latest adventures: http://www.w-rabbit.com/gerbils.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2000 12:02:39 -0700 From: "Randy R." Subject: Happy 4th (100% UFO content) I just returned from a great camping trip in the Cascade mountains. I hooked up with a couple of friends, bought food and beer, and hit the road. So let me ask you Feggy types; are we alone? I finally saw a UFO. I've kept up on the paranormal accounts ever since I was old enough to read and have never seen one until now. I'll try and describe it. It was like a bright star, and it appeared to be quite high up and hovered over our campground for at least an hour. It was around midnight on the 4th of July. It was up there long enough to give me a chance to grab my video camera, and for us to play the *skeptics* and try and explain it away. It changed colors 3 times that I saw, from whitish to blue to orangish. It was a bright light that zipped back and forth like it was a ping pong ball. I carry a video camera to sight Bigfoot, so I was unprepared for a damn UFO. The footage came out quite well, but since it was just a light, it's doubtful that any credible evidence exists from my amateur shooting. But I now have all the video proof I need. For myself anyway. Dare I risk all credibility by mentioning what else happened? Yes I will. 2 jets went streaking by after about 1/2 hour after we started watching it. The UFO kept up it's normal behavior. Then, we saw some dull orange flashes up in that area of the sky, and my camping buddy swore he saw a small, reddish ball eject from the main UFO. What do we make of this? I wasn't able to catch that part on tape, so I can only rely on what I saw. It was much too high for fireworks, and any fireworks that I've been familiar with don't hang directly above for an hour, and zip back and forth. My theory is that the curious ET's wanted to check out why all these crazy humans are setting off fireworks. That's my take. Apologies to those I may have offended, Vince ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 20:17:26 -0400 From: tim fuller and randi spiegel Subject: o quebec! o canada! part 329 Tim Fuller said: > > > I was paying the price for being from Toronto and not Plattsburgh. See, we in > > Toronto are the remnant of the evil anglo forces that tried to keep Montreal an > > english-speaking city. If I was a tourist from Upstate New > > York I figure I'd be treated very well. > and then Dominic from Montreal said: > Ha ! > > You consider that this guy wasn't "treating" you well 'cos he couldn't > properly understand what you were saying ? Being a french-speaking > Canadian myself, I couldn't resist but to reply to your comments. If I > was in Toronto, would it be alright for me to feel persecuted if nobody > understands my French ? Of course, no...Come on, English is an official > language in Canada, so I should be able to speak it...But it seems that > this doesn't apply to anglophones as far as French is considered.... and to this Jason Wilson Brown replied: > I think the complaint is that the clerk pretended not to understand the > guys english and when his fellow quebecois said something in english > he responded. If the guy didnt understand english at all there would be > no reasonable complaint especially considering we are talking about Quebec > city. and some place like montreal or Hull. Hoo, boy...I should've known better than to get in to this thing. Yes - Dominic, you're completely right. I have no right to expect others to understand my English when it is clearly not the language used by the majority the people in whatever area I'm visiting. As Jason pointed out, it was the fact that the fellow behind the counter *did* understand English but chose not to understand *my* English. He was under no obligation to understand me or want to - except from a customer service point of view (which is a silly complaint in a record store). It is unfair, in a sense, that most Canadians do not speak French. Other than the fact that it is a beautiful language, we should all try to learn it better because it *is* a part of our heritage. Canada was 'created' through the efforts of 1) The Aboriginal Population 2) The French and English or 2) The English and the French. (Although I don't know how many of us can speak Mohawk.) Fact is, when we were watching the last referendum, we (sorry but I am 'outing' Randi as a 'Oui' supporter with explanation) felt that Quebec *should* go. It was as much a point of saying, "Yeah, they're right!" as much as, "Fine, stop kvetching and leave already!" It seemed that things had gotten so divisive that there was no turning back, which I think is exactly what Mssrs. Parizeau and Bouchard intended. Perhaps my persecution complex was some sort of manifestation of my guilt over this whole thing ("don't you agree, Doctor?!"). But I don't think that Quebec City - which must rely largely on tourism dollars (as does Toronto and Montreal) - could afford to treat all visitors that way. If I was not expected to know French - as would be the case if I was visiting from somewhere in Upstate New York or New England - I would be treated with respect for no better reason than my tourist dollars. That's OK because politics aren't involved. Just the good ol' fashioned exchange of currencies. I was wrong because I *should* know French. I took it from Grade 5 to Grade 12 and though I am quite adept at 'Pitou' and 'Michel' eating too much cake ("...Michel est tres malade..."), I could not create a basic sentence when I needed to. Give me a few months in Quebec (or better still, how about Chicoutimi?) and I would learn. But then I would return to Toronto and watch helplessly as it all went away again. I have been in retail for almost fifteen years. I have helped many people when all I had to go on was painfully fractured English. I have even helped a person or two who could only speak French. It was not easy, but the will was there. It is this essential desire to 'understand the other' that I did not experience and would not expect to experience in many parts of Quebec. The often-used snarl and look of disgust I received from the guy at the record store was, however, understood quite well. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2000 17:45:12 -0700 From: Eb Subject: random hype I've had the new Blonde Redhead album (Melody of Certain Damaged Lemons) for over two months, but put off playing it until just the other day. Wow...this album is *good*! Anyone else have it? Easily my favorite of the three BR albums I have. The band experimentally mellowed its sound, and it really opens up the group's textures on a harmonic level. The lyrics are rather duff (all of them speak English as a second language, correct?), but I really enjoy the music a lot. Surprisingly, a couple of tracks remind me of the Shangri-La's classic "Walking in the Sand," a song which I've always loved. A similar waltzing feel and sense of over-the-top drama. Anyway, back to the Gerbil Diaries.... Eb http://users.deltanet.com/~gondola/np.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 21:05:26 -0400 From: tim fuller and randi spiegel Subject: "Vive le Rhode Island libre!" > Natalie Jacobs wrote > > n., who once pissed off her parents by buying a Quebecois flag and waving it > > out the car window screaming "Free Quebec!" during a trip through Ontario Michael R Godwin wrote > I think you mean "Vive le Quebec libre!" I think "Free Quebec!" is a more effective out-of-the-window-of-a-moving-car sound bite than "Vive le Quebec libre!", which must be spoken from on high and only when no one is expecting it. (Rumour has it, de Gaulle was very tired that day, and it has not been verified - much like the cancer effect from cigarettes - that he fully meant what he said.) neat insight to the 'neverendum' issue: http://www.theshrubbery.com/0799/canada0799.html and a link that shows Quebec's efforts have, errr, widespread appeal http://www.dixienet.org/spatriot/vol4no1/vive_quebec_libre.htm and a high-falutin' and somewhat paranoid (albeit not completely untrue) take on the whole event: http://www.mcgill.ca/mqup/xtbosher.htm n.p. with decided irony, The Band, "Acadian Driftwood" ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2000 01:26:12 GMT From: "James Hadfield" Subject: Re: Happy 4th (100% UFO content) >I finally saw a UFO. I've kept up on the paranormal accounts ever since I >was old enough to read and have never seen one until now. I'll try and >describe it. > >It was like a bright star, and it appeared to be quite high up and hovered >over our campground for at least an hour. It was around midnight on the >4th >of July. It was up there long enough to give me a chance to grab my video >camera, and for us to play the *skeptics* and try and explain it away. It >changed colors 3 times that I saw, from whitish to blue to orangish. It >was >a bright light that zipped back and forth like it was a ping pong ball. I >carry a video camera to sight Bigfoot, so I was unprepared for a damn UFO. >The footage came out quite well, but since it was just a light, it's >doubtful that any credible evidence exists from my amateur shooting. But I >now have all the video proof I need. For myself anyway. > >Dare I risk all credibility by mentioning what else happened? Yes I will. > >2 jets went streaking by after about 1/2 hour after we started watching it. >The UFO kept up it's normal behavior. Then, we saw some dull orange >flashes >up in that area of the sky, and my camping buddy swore he saw a small, >reddish ball eject from the main UFO. Was this before or after they beamed you aboard? ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2000 22:43:04 -0400 From: overbury@cn.ca Subject: Re: "Vive le Rhode Island libre!" > and a link that shows Quebec's efforts have, errr, widespread appeal > > http://www.dixienet.org/spatriot/vol4no1/vive_quebec_libre.htm From that page: ==================== "Je me souvriens" - -- "I remember": The motto of Quebec, displayed on all license plates ==================== Tee hee! For those who don't speak french, "souviens" means "remember", and "rien" means "nothing". "Je me souviens" ("I remember") was taken from the poem by Eugene Tache that reads "I remember that born under the Lily, I have prospered under the Rose". That's a rather non-separatist take on the subject, don't you-all think? - -- Ross Overbury Montreal, Quebec, Canada ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 23:12:23 -0400 From: johann johann Subject: Re: a new home when we last left our heroes, The Kielbasa Kid exclaimed: >now i'm off to see The Perfect Storm, and pray god it doesn't suck *too* >badly (me being such a monumental lover of storms, though, i just cannot >resist). saw it last weekend. not bad, but it seemed fractured somehow. the yacht rescue, while nice eye candy (pod race anyone?), was ultimately distracting from the core events dealing with the swordboat's crew -- as was the random shots of cargo ships and tankers wallowing the waves. the tv meterologist, however earnest, was laughable -- should've had a national weather service fellow calling those shots. i could have done without the periodic geographical sub-titles too. still, despite the tragedy of too much testosterone ("are we gloustermen or what?!?") and several other tired plot devices ("one last trip for the money", the rivalry between sully and murph, bugsy's budding romance with irene, etc.), i still enjoyed it. not sure why. perhaps because the fishermen's lives probably were as they were depicted, stereotypes and all. i guess i'm more tolerant of cliche when there's a kernel of truth at its core.... woj ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 17:10:46 +1200 From: digja611@student.otago.ac.nz Subject: Re: fegmaniax-digest V9 #181 >I'm currently writing my master's thesis in Linguistics and I've come >across an English example that I would like to ask you about (native >speakers only). These are examples for so-called self-embedded relative >clauses. > >a) The farmer that the cow that gave bad milk kicked died. >b) The farmer whom the cow that gave bad milk kicked died. > >Do you feel that one is better than the other? Do you think that the bad >sentence(s) violate the grammar or that they are simply "bad" sentences >because they are too hard to parse/understand? although I am no longer in the original home of English, I was born there and am a native speaker. So, I can say that (2) is correct. (1) is hard to parse, and is clumsy due to the repetition of the word 'that'. Also, technically, the first use of 'that' is incorrect. In that construct, only 'whom', 'who' or 'which' are logical words to follow 'farmer'. Since the farmer is a person, not an object, 'which' cannot be used. Since the farmer is the object of the action rather than the subject (compare 'the farmer who kicked the cow', which would have the farmer as the object and the cow as the subject), 'whom' should be used, and not 'who'. James James Dignan___________________________________ You talk to me Deptmt of Psychology, Otago University As if from a distance ya zhivu v' 50 Norfolk Street And I reply. . . . . . . . . . Dunedin, New Zealand with impressions chosen from another time steam megaphone (03) 455-7807 (Brian Eno - "By this River") ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 05:15:41 -0400 From: "jbranscombe@compuserve.com" Subject: Yoo-Foes >The UFO kept up its normal behaviour< I especially liked the above phrase. Beer, fireworks, clear sky, stars, wobbly camcorder. I don't think Mulder would get out of bed for this one. There are lots good sceptic pages on the web. To draw a perhaps presumptuous inference from your post, Vince (especially the Bigfoot mention) I think you've had a fairly unbalanced info diet up till now. jmbc ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 13:21:35 +0100 (BST) From: Michael R Godwin Subject: Astounding tune similarity While I was moping in bed sick for several weeks, I began to think about astounding tune similarities. The one which really struck me was the Bugs Bunny theme tune, 'This is it' ("Overture, light the lights, this is it, we'll hit the heights", that one). It is almost a direct ripoff of 'Everything's coming up roses' ("Curtain up, light the lights, we've got nothing to hit but the heights"), which I believe is from 'Gypsy'. Not only is the tune near-identical, but the sentiments are pretty similar. Has Bugs ever been sued over this song? - - Mike "nothing better to do" Godwin ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 08:27:55 -0400 From: basil@naxs.com (Brad Hutchinson) Subject: Fwd: Re: Linguistic question >> >> >>> >Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000 14:54:24 +0200 >>> >From: Sebastian Hagedorn <> >>> >To: Fegmaniax >>> >Subject: Linguistic question >>> >MIME-Version: 1.0 >>> >X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by smoe.org >>>id IAA13710 >>> >Sender: owner-fegmaniax@smoe.org >>> >Reply-To: Sebastian Hagedorn >>> >Precedence: bulk >>> >X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by smoe.org >>>id IAA13763 >>> > >>> >Hi! >>> > >>> >I'm currently writing my master's thesis in Linguistics and I've come >>> >across an English example that I would like to ask you about (native >>> >speakers only). These are examples for so-called self-embedded relative >>> >clauses. >>> > >>> >a) The farmer that the cow that gave bad milk kicked died. >>> >b) The farmer whom the cow that gave bad milk kicked died. >>> > >>> >Do you feel that one is better than the other? Do you think that the bad >>> >sentence(s) violate the grammar or that they are simply "bad" sentences >>> >because they are too hard to parse/understand? >>> > >>> >I'll give you my reasons for asking later. Thanks for helping me out. >>> > >>> >Cheers, Sebastian >>> >-- >>> >Sebastian Hagedorn >>> >Ehrenfeldgürtel 156, 50823 Köln, Germany >>> >http://www.spinfo.uni-koeln.de/~hgd/ >>> > >> >> >>As an English teacher, I'd have to say that A is "wrong" because >>one never uses _that_ with people. Using _which_ is acceptable, >>but using _that_ is making the person an object--not a person. >>_That_ can be used with object and animals, _which_ and _who/whom_ >>is to be used with people. Due to the fear of _who/whom_ errors, >>this rule is slowly being ignored by most folks. I keep to it with >>my students. This is just a prescriptive grammar point of view, of >>course. >> >>I would also have a student revise the sentence to make it less >>cumbersome as well! >>Brad Hutchinson (basil@naxs.com) - -- Accuracy of observation is the equivalent of accuracy of thinking. - --Wallace Stevens - -------------------------------------------------------------- Brad Hutchinson--basil@naxs.com--bhutchin@bristolvaschools.org ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 14:28:04 +0100 (BST) From: Michael R Godwin Subject: Re: o quebec! o canada! part 329 > Tim Fuller said: > Fact is, when we were watching the last referendum, we (sorry but I am > 'outing' Randi as a 'Oui' supporter with explanation) felt that Quebec > *should* go. It was as much a point of saying, "Yeah, they're right!" > as much as, "Fine, stop kvetching and leave already!" It seemed that > things had gotten so divisive that there was no turning back, which I > think is exactly what Mssrs. Parizeau and Bouchard intended. 2 Qs: 1) What is 'kvetching'? Doesn't sound Eng. or Fr. Yiddish, possibly? Or Platt-Deutsch? 2) Are these Bouchards any relation of Albert and Joe of BOC fame? - - Mike Godwin ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V9 #182 *******************************