Language and English

From: Richard Erlacher <edick_at_idcomm.com>
Date: Sat Jan 5 06:36:46 2002

Well, I was giving the guy the benefit of the doubt. I figured someone had
fixed the shift key and punctuation keys on his typewriter by now.

As for the other remark, I'd say we should keep it clean. We don't want the
kids to think that adults express themselves in that way.

Dick

----- Original Message -----
From: "M H Stein" <mhstein_at_usa.net>
To: "'ClassicComputers'" <classiccmp_at_classiccmp.org>
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 9:22 PM
Subject: Language and English


> Well, I DO want to nitpick; never thought I'd come to
> Dick's defense, but nothing wrong with *E*.*E*. Cummings
> AFAIK:
>
> http://www.gvsu.edu/english/cummings/caps.htm
>
> Any statistics available on what percentage of text on
> this list actually concerns computers? Often amusing and
> occasionally interesting though; particularly ironic
> that almost all replies criticizing spelling, etc. also
> contained at least one typo or spelling/grammar error...
> (not to mention Doc's 'e.e' criticism)
>
> C'mon, guys (since the gals are obviously more mature), isn't
> this getting a little nasty for a friendly group like this?
> Free speech, diversity of opinions, yes, but do we need words
> like a**hole?
>
> mike
> (In .ca despite usa.net address :)
> -----------------Original Message---------------------
> Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 11:05:43 -0600 (CST)
> From: Doc <doc_at_mdrconsult.com>
> Subject: Re: Language and English
>
> On Fri, 4 Jan 2002, Richard Erlacher wrote:
> <snip>
> > If you insist on writing in a style reminiscent of E. E. Cummings poetry,
> > you may find that your messages are read by readers of this forum with
about
> > the same frequency as E.E. Cummings' work, which might be a shame, in case
> > you really do have something significant to contribute. or in case I'm the
> > only one who doesn't read much Cummings.
>
> Nah, I like ee cummings. And not to nitpick, but your rendering of
> his name is incorrect.
> <snip>
> I submit further that none of the mortals on the classiccmp list have
> evolved to that literary level.
> ***
> Umm... a somewhat sweeping generalization...
> mike
> ***
> <snip>
>
> Doc
>
>
>
Received on Sat Jan 05 2002 - 06:36:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Oct 10 2014 - 23:34:52 BST