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 difficult
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
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,
But it was, that's what
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:
(...)
Ulterior is certainly not
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 get the
On 2012-04-05, Dotan Cohen dotanco...@gmail.com 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?
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 would a native
On Tue, 03 Apr 2012 11:14:55 -0700, John Jason Jordan wrote:
On Tue, 3 Apr 2012 15:41:20 + (UTC) Camaleón noela...@gmail.com
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
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.
Maybe, but
On Tuesday 03 April 2012 22:09:15 Dotan Cohen wrote:
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 16:21, Lisi lisi.re...@gmail.com 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
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
in my own
On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 10:21, Lisi lisi.re...@gmail.com 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
On Wed, 4 Apr 2012 16:07:35 -0400
Dotan Cohen dotanco...@gmail.com 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
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't
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 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
On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 18:56, Lisi lisi.re...@gmail.com 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 Thu, 5 Apr 2012 00:00:02 +0100
Lisi lisi.re...@gmail.com 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
On 05/04/12 06:07, Dotan Cohen wrote:
On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 10:21, Lisi lisi.re...@gmail.com 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
, 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 correct English usage, I thought
it would be helpful to point this out before the word got incorporated
into Debian documentation.
I
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 correct English usage, I thought
it would be helpful to point this out before the word got incorporated
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 seemed mainly about correct English usage, I thought
it would be helpful
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 seemed mainly about correct English usage, I thought
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, ...?
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 English, or is
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
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
* Camaleón noela...@gmail.com [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 Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 07:09, Pierre Frenkiel pierre.frenk...@gmail.com 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
On Tue, 3 Apr 2012 05:29:56 -0500
Indulekha indule...@theunworthy.com 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
On Tue, 03 Apr 2012 14:50:07 +, Russell L. Harris wrote:
(careful when quoting...)
* Camaleón noela...@gmail.com [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,
you wrote:
On Tue, 3 Apr 2012 05:29:56 -0500
Indulekha indule...@theunworthy.com 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
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 speakers.
On 03/04/12 17:41, Camaleón wrote:
On Tue, 03 Apr 2012 14:50:07 +, Russell L. Harris wrote:
(careful when quoting...)
* Camaleónnoela...@gmail.com [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
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 American
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...)
* Camaleónnoela...@gmail.com [120403 13:51]:
On Tue, 03 Apr 2012 05:29:56 -0500, Indulekha wrote:
In
On Tue, 3 Apr 2012 15:41:20 + (UTC)
Camaleón noela...@gmail.com 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
On 04/03/2012 09:05 AM, Indulekha wrote:
you wrote:
On Tue, 3 Apr 2012 05:29:56 -0500
Indulekhaindule...@theunworthy.com 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
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
Indulekhaindule...@theunworthy.com wrote:
Are all these distionnaries wrong?
There is nothing wrong with your English or those definitions,
they're just obscure and
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 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
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 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 ask, what side of
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 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,
. 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 correct English usage, I thought
it would be helpful to point this out before
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 10:50, Russell L. Harris
rlhar...@broadcaster.org 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.
or
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 16:21, Lisi lisi.re...@gmail.com 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
48 matches
Mail list logo
