| Author |
Message |
Oliver Cromm
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 8:44 pm
Post subject: Hope for the US? |
|
|
Bush Begins New Term, Vows to End Tyranny
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-4745960,00.html>
Do headlines like this one really say what they want to say?
Did Bush approve this message?
--
Oliver C. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
CyberCypher
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 9:11 pm
Post subject: Re: Hope for the US? |
|
|
Oliver Cromm wrote on 21 Jan 2005:
He's going to emulate that man's man Yukio Mishima and commit seppuku
(harakiri; harry carey to most Americans; suicide by self-
disembowelment, sorta).
--
Franke: EFL teacher & medical editor
For email, replace numbers with English alphabet. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Donna Richoux
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 10:18 pm
Post subject: Re: Hope for the US? |
|
|
Oliver Cromm <lispamateur@internet.uqam.ca> wrote:
I guess I'm suffering from global dimming (honestly, the latest concern)
because I don't get the joke.
Common headline technique, equivalent to:
Bush begins new term; he vows to end tyranny.
He did, and he did. Oh, are you wondering whether stating a goal is a
vow? I guess there's a point to be made there (although you didn't make
it.) Some headline jargon uses the conveniently short "vow" for all
sorts of promises. Like "ban" for all sorts of prevention and "hit" for
all sorts of criticism.
Bush's full sentence, from Google News, is:
So it is the policy of the United States to seek
and support the growth of democratic movements and
institutions in every nation and culture with the
ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world.
Hm. Grammatically, does "with the goal" describe the kind the nations
and cultures, or does it refer back to the motivation of the US policy?
It does seem vaguer than some of the headlines imply. Anyway, I'm sure
he did a nice job of reading his script out loud.
--
Best -- Donna Richoux |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CV
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 10:43 pm
Post subject: Re: Hope for the US? |
|
|
Donna Richoux wrote:
| Quote: | Oliver Cromm <lispamateur@internet.uqam.ca> wrote:
Bush Begins New Term, Vows to End Tyranny
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-4745960,00.html
Do headlines like this one really say what they want to say?
Did Bush approve this message?
I guess I'm suffering from global dimming (honestly, the latest concern)
because I don't get the joke.
|
I can be understood as his previous term having been tyranny,
which he now intends to end.
CV |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Donna Richoux
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 11:06 pm
Post subject: Re: Hope for the US? |
|
|
CV <or254498@hotmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Donna Richoux wrote:
Oliver Cromm <lispamateur@internet.uqam.ca> wrote:
Bush Begins New Term, Vows to End Tyranny
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-4745960,00.html
Do headlines like this one really say what they want to say?
Did Bush approve this message?
I guess I'm suffering from global dimming (honestly, the latest concern)
because I don't get the joke.
I can be understood as his previous term having been tyranny,
which he now intends to end.
|
How could he vow to end a term if we know he's already begun another?
They don't run concurrently.
Ohhh, Bush vows to end *his* tyranny of -- oh, for pete's sake.
All right, I'd say that's conceivably within the reach of deliberate
meanness on the part of the Guardian. If they employ headline writers
who don't actually care to reflect the body of the story but are only
looking for a dig.
--
Tch, tch -- Donna Richoux |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Oliver Cromm
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 12:28 am
Post subject: Re: Hope for the US? |
|
|
* Donna Richoux wrote:
| Quote: | Oliver Cromm <lispamateur@internet.uqam.ca> wrote:
Bush Begins New Term, Vows to End Tyranny
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-4745960,00.html
Do headlines like this one really say what they want to say?
Did Bush approve this message?
I guess I'm suffering from global dimming (honestly, the latest concern)
because I don't get the joke.
Common headline technique, equivalent to:
Bush begins new term; he vows to end tyranny.
|
My sontaneous reading was: "Bush vows that his second term will not be a
tyranny like the first one." Is it an unlikely reading for native
speakers, or does it depend on the label attached to the branch linking
"Bush" with "tyranny" on your mind-map?
The respected German weekly "Die Zeit" titled yesterday:
| Ist Amerika noch eine Demokratie?
Is America still a democracy?
(... or a mobocracy? - The author is an Italian philosopher, and his
main intention isn't America-bashing, he sees a global trend.)
--
Oliver C.
45n31, 73w34
Temperatur: -17°C (-2 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
don groves
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 3:16 am
Post subject: Re: Hope for the US? |
|
|
In article <Xns95E5E1C8B7AB5cctxt2002@130.133.1.4>, CyberCypher
at cybercypher@19-16-25-13-01-03.com hath writ:
| Quote: | Oliver Cromm wrote on 21 Jan 2005:
Bush Begins New Term, Vows to End Tyranny
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-4745960,00.html
Do headlines like this one really say what they want to say?
Did Bush approve this message?
He's going to emulate that man's man Yukio Mishima and commit seppuku
(harakiri; harry carey to most Americans; suicide by self-
disembowelment, sorta).
|
If he needs a second, I'm available.
--
dg (domain=ccwebster) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mickwick
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 3:57 am
Post subject: Re: Hope for the US? |
|
|
In alt.usage.english, Donna Richoux wrote:
| Quote: | I guess I'm suffering from global dimming (honestly, the latest concern)
because I don't get the joke.
|
[...]
You're out of date, Donna. Global goating is the very latest concern.
Goats are doubly dastardly: they are a major cause of both global
warming (flatus, reduced photosynthesis, dung-burning) *and* of global
dimming/cooling (dust clouds arising from desertification). What's more,
aegogenic desertification condemns millions, perhaps billions of humans
to lives of permanent poverty and periodic famine beyond the cash
economy and it leads to vast amounts of soil being washed into the
oceans, which, according to Archimedes, who probably knew more about
goats than was good for him, must cause sea levels to rise.
And yet Oxfam is currently shipping goats to Africa.
Mon biot! Has the world gone mad?
(Google:
[sahara bread-basket over-grazing] 56
[geldof navel-gazing] 80
[monbiot basket-case] 175.)
*
ObAUE: Matthew Parris, in an article about global goating in the latest
issue of The Spectator:
(I wonder what calculations the global warming industry has made
of the relative contributions to sea-level-rise of ice-melt
versus soil-dump. I find it hard to believe they know.)
'It has ... they know.' Is the global warming industry singular or
plural? Make up your mind, Mr Parris.
More collective noun confusion, this time from _The Great Gatsby_:
His [Tom Buchanan's] family were enormously wealthy ...
The rest of the sentence is all about Tom: the family isn't/aren't
mentioned again.
I thought the American rule was that collective nouns get treated as
plurals only when the constituent individuals are being emphasised -
'His family was wealthy', 'His family were all money-grubbers' - so that
the default 'family was' would be more correct/usual there.
Fitzgerald was a very careful writer. (Incidentally, his full name is a
partial anagram of 'The Zany Soak invented Creative Writing and
condemned American Letters to One Hundred Years of Preciousness'.) It
seems unlikely that his 'family were' is a mistake.
Could it be that the narrator's preppieness meant that he affected
Britishisms in the hope of boosting his social standing?
('He were right wealthy, were old Tom - kept a string of whippets and
cut crusts off his loaves. It were hard to stomach that a man of my own
generation were wealthy enough to do that.')
--
Mickwick |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike Lyle
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 5:40 am
Post subject: Re: Hope for the US? |
|
|
Mickwick wrote:
| Quote: | In alt.usage.english, Donna Richoux wrote:
I guess I'm suffering from global dimming (honestly, the latest
concern) because I don't get the joke.
[...]
You're out of date, Donna. Global goating is the very latest
concern.
Goats are doubly dastardly: they are a major cause of both global
warming (flatus, reduced photosynthesis, dung-burning) *and* of
global
dimming/cooling (dust clouds arising from desertification). What's
more, aegogenic desertification condemns millions, perhaps billions
of humans to lives of permanent poverty and periodic famine beyond
the cash economy and it leads to vast amounts of soil being washed
into the oceans, which, according to Archimedes, who probably knew
more about goats than was good for him, must cause sea levels to
rise.
And yet Oxfam is currently shipping goats to Africa.
Mon biot! Has the world gone mad?
|
"Mon Biot!" is one of your very best, MW. But no, it's OK: the world
hasn't gone mad -- it's always been like that. See Tacitus, among
others. Umberto Eco too, I shouldn't bloody well wonder.
Are they really shipping the fuckers? I thought they were just giving
the locals the money to buy them.
But did you catch the bit where Ton Biot accused Jeremy Clarkson of
needing penis-enlargement? I don't suppose it's on Auntie's Listen
Again click.
| Quote: |
(Google:
[sahara bread-basket over-grazing] 56
[geldof navel-gazing] 80
[monbiot basket-case] 175.)
*
ObAUE: Matthew Parris, in an article about global goating in the
latest issue of The Spectator:
(I wonder what calculations the global warming industry has
made of the relative contributions to sea-level-rise of
ice-melt versus soil-dump. I find it hard to believe they
know.)
|
I find it hard to believe Matthew knows more about it than people who
do the measurements. See Bay of Bengal while you still need a boat to
cross it. If he thinks people haven't been worrying about erosion for
over a century and a half, he's very nearly a match for Germaine
Greer in the mouth-shooting-off stakes. (Which, as one who has an
irritated fondness for both of them, I was actually inclined to think
already.)
| Quote: |
'It has ... they know.' Is the global warming industry singular or
plural? Make up your mind, Mr Parris.
More collective noun confusion, this time from _The Great Gatsby_:
[...] |
Do you mind if I skip the Fitzgerald bit for now? I've always felt
his Rubaiyat a touch overblown, and I'm not drunk enough to do
Eastern Promise, however Preppy. You're quite right about the
pronoun, of course: a dashed bad business, but they don't mind that
kind of thing on the Continent.
Mike. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bill Bonde ( ''The chambe
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 7:06 am
Post subject: Re: Hope for the US? |
|
|
don groves wrote:
| Quote: |
In article <Xns95E5E1C8B7AB5cctxt2002@130.133.1.4>, CyberCypher
at cybercypher@19-16-25-13-01-03.com hath writ:
Oliver Cromm wrote on 21 Jan 2005:
Bush Begins New Term, Vows to End Tyranny
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-4745960,00.html
Do headlines like this one really say what they want to say?
Did Bush approve this message?
He's going to emulate that man's man Yukio Mishima and commit seppuku
(harakiri; harry carey to most Americans; suicide by self-
disembowelment, sorta).
If he needs a second, I'm available.
Do you promise to go second? |
--
Personally, I believe that 9/11 should have taught us the lesson that we
can't let these countries simmer endlessly in disillusionment without
doing something about it because people become susceptible to delusional
ideas and delusional actions. Iraq, in my view, is but the first of many
efforts, certainly not all military, to remake the very face of the
world as constitutional representative democracy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
don groves
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 8:05 am
Post subject: Re: Hope for the US? |
|
|
In article <41F19901.8D833547@backpacker.com>, Bill Bonde ( ''The
chamber was in confusion, all the voices shouting loud'' ) at
stderr2@backpacker.com hath writ:
| Quote: |
don groves wrote:
In article <Xns95E5E1C8B7AB5cctxt2002@130.133.1.4>, CyberCypher
at cybercypher@19-16-25-13-01-03.com hath writ:
Oliver Cromm wrote on 21 Jan 2005:
Bush Begins New Term, Vows to End Tyranny
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-4745960,00.html
Do headlines like this one really say what they want to say?
Did Bush approve this message?
He's going to emulate that man's man Yukio Mishima and commit seppuku
(harakiri; harry carey to most Americans; suicide by self-
disembowelment, sorta).
If he needs a second, I'm available.
Do you promise to go second?
|
Take the second swipe, sure. It always better to be certain.
--
dg (domain=ccwebster) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mickwick
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 23, 2005 6:42 am
Post subject: Re: Hope for the US? |
|
|
In alt.usage.english, Mike Lyle wrote:
| Quote: | Are they really shipping the fuckers? I thought they were just giving
the locals the money to buy them.
|
You're right. Oxfam says that the goats are 'sourced locally'.
Some fascinating websites are returned by a Google with [goat-inflation]
but, alas, none of them is relevant to Oxfam's current goat initiative.
[...]
| Quote: | I find it hard to believe Matthew knows more about it than people who
do the measurements.
|
Matthew's point was, I think, that nobody has yet done these
measurements, most likely because conventional eco-angst requires a
Western culprit.
| Quote: | See Bay of Bengal while you still need a boat to cross it.
|
(... while you still *don't* need a boat to cross it, surely?)
| Quote: | If he thinks people haven't been worrying about erosion for
over a century and a half, he's very nearly a match for Germaine
Greer in the mouth-shooting-off stakes. (Which, as one who has an
irritated fondness for both of them, I was actually inclined to think
already.)
|
Ten years ago, Germaine Greer was a mensch. (Before that, she was an
admirable cow.) Now? She's just another big fat figure of fun. Who would
have thought?
--
Mickwick |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike Lyle
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 23, 2005 6:49 pm
Post subject: Re: Hope for the US? |
|
|
Mickwick wrote:
[...]> [...]
| Quote: |
I find it hard to believe Matthew knows more about it than people
who
do the measurements.
Matthew's point was, I think, that nobody has yet done these
measurements, most likely because conventional eco-angst requires a
Western culprit.
|
There are decent estimates out there. I think FAO still have some
stuff on it, for example. I used to know more about the sources for
this kind of thing.
| Quote: |
See Bay of Bengal while you still need a boat to cross it.
(... while you still *don't* need a boat to cross it, surely?)
|
Almost.
[...]
Mike. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bill Bonde ( ''The chambe
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:45 am
Post subject: Re: Hope for the US? |
|
|
Oliver Cromm wrote:
| Quote: |
* Donna Richoux wrote:
Oliver Cromm <lispamateur@internet.uqam.ca> wrote:
Bush Begins New Term, Vows to End Tyranny
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-4745960,00.html
Do headlines like this one really say what they want to say?
Did Bush approve this message?
I guess I'm suffering from global dimming (honestly, the latest concern)
because I don't get the joke.
Common headline technique, equivalent to:
Bush begins new term; hevowstoendtyranny.
My sontaneous reading was: "Bush vows that his second term will not be a
tyranny like the first one." Is it an unlikely reading for native
speakers, or does it depend on the label attached to the branch linking
"Bush" with "tyranny" on your mind-map?
The respected German weekly "Die Zeit" titled yesterday:
| Ist Amerika noch eine Demokratie?
Is America still a democracy?
(... or a mobocracy? - The author is an Italian philosopher, and his
main intention isn't America-bashing, he sees a global trend.)
You mean?: http://www.zeit.de/2005/04/Demokratie_USA |
--
Personally, I believe that 9/11 should have taught us the lesson that we
can't let these countries simmer endlessly in disillusionment without
doing something about it because people become susceptible to delusional
ideas and delusional actions. Iraq, in my view, is but the first of many
efforts, certainly not all military, to remake the very face of the
world as constitutional representative democracy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Martin Ambuhl
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 24, 2005 8:12 am
Post subject: Re: Hope for the US? |
|
|
Oliver Cromm wrote:
| Quote: | * Donna Richoux wrote:
Is America still a democracy?
(... or a mobocracy? - The author is an Italian philosopher, and his
main intention isn't America-bashing, he sees a global trend.)
|
Here is the word you wanted:
[COD10]
ochlocracy /Qk"lQkr@si/
· n. formal government by the populace; mob rule.
– DERIVATIVES ochlocrat n. ochlocratic adj.
– ORIGIN C16: via Fr. from Gk okhlokratia, from okhlos ‘mob’ + -kratia
‘power’. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in