Discussion:
The English language is doomed
Add Reply
Steve Hayes
2018-10-11 03:13:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Noam Chomsky, the plain-speaking philosopher and cognitive scientist
par excellence, complained to a French newspaper last year that “when
I hear words like ‘dialectic’ or ‘hermeneutic’ and other
pseudo-profundities, then, like Goering, I reach for my gun”…

Read it all here:

https://t.co/NoRMuaFCLC
--
Ignore the following - it's spammers for spambot fodder.

***@gmail.com
***@gmail.com
***@gmail.com
***@gmail.com
***@gmail.com
***@gmail.com
***@gmail.com
***@gmail.com
***@gmail.com
***@gmail.com
David Kleinecke
2018-10-11 04:15:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Steve Hayes
Noam Chomsky, the plain-speaking philosopher and cognitive scientist
par excellence, complained to a French newspaper last year that “when
I hear words like ‘dialectic’ or ‘hermeneutic’ and other
pseudo-profundities, then, like Goering, I reach for my gun”…
https://t.co/NoRMuaFCLC
I don't know whether I agree or not. The article had IMO far
too many words arranged in far too formal sentences.

There is a noteworthy example of authority meddling with
language in I think it is the fourth book of Gene Wolfe's
"The Book of the New Sun". It is about language even though
IMO it's the dullest passage in all four books.
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2018-10-11 06:11:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by David Kleinecke
Post by Steve Hayes
Noam Chomsky, the plain-speaking philosopher and cognitive scientist
par excellence, complained to a French newspaper last year that “when
I hear words like ‘dialectic’ or ‘hermeneutic’ and other
pseudo-profundities, then, like Goering, I reach for my gun”…
https://t.co/NoRMuaFCLC
I don't know whether I agree or not. The article had IMO far
too many words arranged in far too formal sentences.
It starts well, but rapidly becomes too wordy to struggle through.
Post by David Kleinecke
There is a noteworthy example of authority meddling with
language in I think it is the fourth book of Gene Wolfe's
"The Book of the New Sun". It is about language even though
IMO it's the dullest passage in all four books.
--
athel
Jerry Friedman
2018-10-11 22:52:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by David Kleinecke
Post by Steve Hayes
Noam Chomsky, the plain-speaking philosopher and cognitive scientist
par excellence, complained to a French newspaper last year that “when
I hear words like ‘dialectic’ or ‘hermeneutic’ and other
pseudo-profundities, then, like Goering, I reach for my gun”…
https://t.co/NoRMuaFCLC
I don't know whether I agree or not. The article had IMO far
too many words arranged in far too formal sentences.
tl;dr
Post by David Kleinecke
There is a noteworthy example of authority meddling with
language in I think it is the fourth book of Gene Wolfe's
"The Book of the New Sun". It is about language even though
IMO it's the dullest passage in all four books.
Yes, the fourth book. I like that part. For me the least interesting,
I couldn't say "dullest", part is Dr. Talos's play.

/The Book of the New Sun/ compares interestingly to Fisk's article,
since in it Wolfe is also writing in a formal, elaborate, old-fashioned
style, but with what disparity in effect! Doubtless, in addition to
Wolfe's greater ability as a writer, some of the superiority of /The
Book of the New Sun/ arises from Wolfe's interestingly invented and
gathered ideas, so unlike Fisk's inconsequent banalities.

(I have a lot of trouble typing "inconsequent", but behind our efforts
let there be found our efforts.)
--
Jerry Friedman
Madrigal Gurneyhalt
2018-10-11 23:04:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by David Kleinecke
Post by Steve Hayes
Noam Chomsky, the plain-speaking philosopher and cognitive scientist
par excellence, complained to a French newspaper last year that “when
I hear words like ‘dialectic’ or ‘hermeneutic’ and other
pseudo-profundities, then, like Goering, I reach for my gun”…
https://t.co/NoRMuaFCLC
I don't know whether I agree or not. The article had IMO far
too many words arranged in far too formal sentences.
tl;dr
Post by David Kleinecke
There is a noteworthy example of authority meddling with
language in I think it is the fourth book of Gene Wolfe's
"The Book of the New Sun". It is about language even though
IMO it's the dullest passage in all four books.
Yes, the fourth book. I like that part. For me the least interesting,
I couldn't say "dullest", part is Dr. Talos's play.
/The Book of the New Sun/ compares interestingly to Fisk's article,
since in it Wolfe is also writing in a formal, elaborate, old-fashioned
style, but with what disparity in effect! Doubtless, in addition to
Wolfe's greater ability as a writer, some of the superiority of /The
Book of the New Sun/ arises from Wolfe's interestingly invented and
gathered ideas, so unlike Fisk's inconsequent banalities.
(I have a lot of trouble typing "inconsequent", but behind our efforts
let there be found our efforts.)
Inconsequential, Shirley (typed without perceptible increase in effort).
Jack
2018-10-11 23:36:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thu, 11 Oct 2018 16:04:44 -0700 (PDT), Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by David Kleinecke
Post by Steve Hayes
Noam Chomsky, the plain-speaking philosopher and cognitive scientist
par excellence, complained to a French newspaper last year that “when
I hear words like ‘dialectic’ or ‘hermeneutic’ and other
pseudo-profundities, then, like Goering, I reach for my gun”…
https://t.co/NoRMuaFCLC
I don't know whether I agree or not. The article had IMO far
too many words arranged in far too formal sentences.
tl;dr
Post by David Kleinecke
There is a noteworthy example of authority meddling with
language in I think it is the fourth book of Gene Wolfe's
"The Book of the New Sun". It is about language even though
IMO it's the dullest passage in all four books.
Yes, the fourth book. I like that part. For me the least interesting,
I couldn't say "dullest", part is Dr. Talos's play.
/The Book of the New Sun/ compares interestingly to Fisk's article,
since in it Wolfe is also writing in a formal, elaborate, old-fashioned
style, but with what disparity in effect! Doubtless, in addition to
Wolfe's greater ability as a writer, some of the superiority of /The
Book of the New Sun/ arises from Wolfe's interestingly invented and
gathered ideas, so unlike Fisk's inconsequent banalities.
(I have a lot of trouble typing "inconsequent", but behind our efforts
let there be found our efforts.)
Inconsequential, Shirley (typed without perceptible increase in effort).
I like 'inconsequent'. Judging by several dictionaries, it shades more
toward 'non sequitur', while 'inconsequential' shades more toward
having no importance or effect.
--
John
Jerry Friedman
2018-10-12 14:21:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jack
On Thu, 11 Oct 2018 16:04:44 -0700 (PDT), Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Madrigal Gurneyhalt
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by David Kleinecke
Post by Steve Hayes
Noam Chomsky, the plain-speaking philosopher and cognitive scientist
par excellence, complained to a French newspaper last year that “when
I hear words like ‘dialectic’ or ‘hermeneutic’ and other
pseudo-profundities, then, like Goering, I reach for my gun”…
https://t.co/NoRMuaFCLC
I don't know whether I agree or not. The article had IMO far
too many words arranged in far too formal sentences.
tl;dr
Post by David Kleinecke
There is a noteworthy example of authority meddling with
language in I think it is the fourth book of Gene Wolfe's
"The Book of the New Sun". It is about language even though
IMO it's the dullest passage in all four books.
Yes, the fourth book. I like that part. For me the least interesting,
I couldn't say "dullest", part is Dr. Talos's play.
/The Book of the New Sun/ compares interestingly to Fisk's article,
since in it Wolfe is also writing in a formal, elaborate, old-fashioned
style, but with what disparity in effect! Doubtless, in addition to
Wolfe's greater ability as a writer, some of the superiority of /The
Book of the New Sun/ arises from Wolfe's interestingly invented and
gathered ideas, so unlike Fisk's inconsequent banalities.
(I have a lot of trouble typing "inconsequent", but behind our efforts
let there be found our efforts.)
Inconsequential, Shirley (typed without perceptible increase in effort).
I like 'inconsequent'. Judging by several dictionaries, it shades more
toward 'non sequitur', while 'inconsequential' shades more toward
having no importance or effect.
Precisely.
--
Jerry Friedman
CDB
2018-10-11 12:46:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Steve Hayes
Noam Chomsky, the plain-speaking philosopher and cognitive scientist
par excellence, complained to a French newspaper last year that “when
I hear words like ‘dialectic’ or ‘hermeneutic’ and other
pseudo-profundities, then, like Goering, I reach for my gun”…
https://t.co/NoRMuaFCLC
Thank you for that article. I have always been willing to listen to
Robert Fisk, and his thoughts on the topic must have the sympathy of
most readers of usage groups.

Human activity appears to move in cycles, and we may simply be sinking
back to a base level of the language; conative or coercive speech has
always been the province of politicians, and the once-abashed majority
have now realised that democracy (or its street-theatre equivalent)
makes politicians of us all.

Jean Chrétien, a man of great practical intelligence, has just written a
book, and has plenty to say about the current First Assaulter of our
common language.

https://tinyurl.com/y9swdpzu

I'm going off to find some Blunden now, but I faith I will be able to
remember "nerb" for future use.
Peter T. Daniels
2018-10-11 13:17:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by CDB
Post by Steve Hayes
Noam Chomsky, the plain-speaking philosopher and cognitive scientist
par excellence, complained to a French newspaper last year that “when
I hear words like ‘dialectic’ or ‘hermeneutic’ and other
pseudo-profundities, then, like Goering, I reach for my gun”…
https://t.co/NoRMuaFCLC
Thank you for that article. I have always been willing to listen to
Robert Fisk, and his thoughts on the topic must have the sympathy of
most readers of usage groups.
Human activity appears to move in cycles, and we may simply be sinking
back to a base level of the language; conative or coercive speech has
always been the province of politicians, and the once-abashed majority
have now realised that democracy (or its street-theatre equivalent)
makes politicians of us all.
Jean Chrétien, a man of great practical intelligence, has just written a
book, and has plenty to say about the current First Assaulter of our
common language.
https://tinyurl.com/y9swdpzu
Is that a bunch of stuff that Canadians didn't know about?
Post by CDB
I'm going off to find some Blunden now, but I faith I will be able to
remember "nerb" for future use.
Madrigal Gurneyhalt
2018-10-11 13:34:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by CDB
Post by Steve Hayes
Noam Chomsky, the plain-speaking philosopher and cognitive scientist
par excellence, complained to a French newspaper last year that “when
I hear words like ‘dialectic’ or ‘hermeneutic’ and other
pseudo-profundities, then, like Goering, I reach for my gun”…
https://t.co/NoRMuaFCLC
Thank you for that article. I have always been willing to listen to
Robert Fisk, and his thoughts on the topic must have the sympathy of
most readers of usage groups.
Must it? It reads to me like a diatribe against anyone who should
dare to use terms figuratively or extend nuances of meaning beyond
the original lest it become scarily expanded beyond the Gold Standard
(a totally imaginary age of perfect English). It is knee-jerk
conservatism, the linguistic equivalent of Little Englander ranting. As
for the nonsense about the weaselling manipulation of language by
business (in consultation with PR experts and lawyers) does he really
imagine that that is some kind of new phenomenon. Perhaps he
should take the time machine he appears to live in, currently stuck in
1920, back to the days of professional rhetoricians in the Roman
Empire when Government and Law were in the thrall of eloquence
prized far ahead of logic and meaning.
Post by CDB
Human activity appears to move in cycles, and we may simply be sinking
back to a base level of the language; conative or coercive speech has
always been the province of politicians, and the once-abashed majority
have now realised that democracy (or its street-theatre equivalent)
makes politicians of us all.
What drivel! The language is mo more nor less robust than it ever was.
It is simply that the likes of Fisk have never been able to get their heads
round the fact that for the vast majority of people language is simply
a tool of communication, an everyday to which they give not a second
thought any more than they do the tying of shoelaces, and that
meta-analysis is a luxury which only a few can afford. Suddenly exposed
to this reality by the explosion of 'published' communications by the
Internet, poor little dears have gone into meltdown and (ab)used their
privileged position as journalists, broadcasters and the like to scold and
disparage. Let's not be fooled. There is no difference between the likes of
Fisk and the sandwich-board prophets of doom who declaim the end of the
world in the high-street. Both are equally deluded!

Stephen Fry's English Delight (a genuine expression of his constant
pleasure in new and unexpected shifts in usage as well as the title of
his splendid little radio show) will always be my guide in what usage
groups 'must' do. No amount of crabby, mean spirited, golden age,
reactionary Pharisaism like Fisk's will persuade me otherwise!
occam
2018-10-11 13:08:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Noam Chomsky, <blah blah>,
https://t.co/NoRMuaFCLC
Here is an excerpt from Fisk's article, which coincidentally links to
another thread here.

" She [Kate O’Brien] was, with ghastly prescience, writing from civil
war Spain in 1937 about the way in which technology would change the way
we think about the world. “Science, *having paid the piper* [my
emphasis], calls the tune,” she wrote in her book Farewell Spain. "
Peter T. Daniels
2018-10-11 13:14:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Steve Hayes
Noam Chomsky, the plain-speaking philosopher and cognitive scientist
Anyone who thinks Chomsky is "plain-speaking" has never either heard him
speak or read his writing.

Anyone who thinks he's a cognitive scientist has no idea what cognitive
scientists do.
Post by Steve Hayes
par excellence, complained to a French newspaper last year that “when
I hear words like ‘dialectic’ or ‘hermeneutic’ and other
pseudo-profundities, then, like Goering, I reach for my gun”…
That is _immensely_ unlikely to have been spoken by Chomsky, the leading
anti-war figure of the later 20th century. It is also highly unlikely
that he would resort to a Nazi analogy. And unthinkable that he owns a gun.

Unless, at his advanced age, his political thinking has gone the way of
his linguistic thinking -- his last little book is essentially incoherent
and incomprehensible: for the first time he addresses political and
linguistic questions between the same covers -- and makes no attempt to
relate them to each other.
Post by Steve Hayes
https://t.co/NoRMuaFCLC
What claptrap. It's the same extreme reactionary nostalgia for styles that
were obsolete when Blunden was employing them. He may be excused for not
having known of Hemingway (though did it actually say when that purple
passage was written?), but English literature too had moved far beyond
that sort of thing.

I read the first several pages, then scanned all the way to the end looking
for some mention of Chomsky, and found none. The complaints about academic
jargon are no different from those heard twenty years ago from those
complaining about post-modernism.
Richard Tobin
2018-10-11 13:45:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
par excellence, complained to a French newspaper last year that “when
I hear words like ‘dialectic’ or ‘hermeneutic’ and other
pseudo-profundities, then, like Goering, I reach for my gun”

That is _immensely_ unlikely to have been spoken by Chomsky, the leading
anti-war figure of the later 20th century. It is also highly unlikely
that he would resort to a Nazi analogy. And unthinkable that he owns a gun.
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=IUGomzBPBi4C&pg=PA230&lpg=PA230&dq="when+words+like+dialectics+come+along"

-- RIchard
Madrigal Gurneyhalt
2018-10-11 14:01:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Steve Hayes
par excellence, complained to a French newspaper last year that “when
I hear words like ‘dialectic’ or ‘hermeneutic’ and other
pseudo-profundities, then, like Goering, I reach for my gun”…
That is _immensely_ unlikely to have been spoken by Chomsky, the leading
anti-war figure of the later 20th century. It is also highly unlikely
that he would resort to a Nazi analogy. And unthinkable that he owns a gun.
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=IUGomzBPBi4C&pg=PA230&lpg=PA230&dq="when+words+like+dialectics+come+along"
Well that's a perfectly good argument wasted for the sake of mere fact! I had
the kettle on and everything!
Peter T. Daniels
2018-10-11 15:47:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Steve Hayes
par excellence, complained to a French newspaper last year that “when
I hear words like ‘dialectic’ or ‘hermeneutic’ and other
pseudo-profundities, then, like Goering, I reach for my gun”…
That is _immensely_ unlikely to have been spoken by Chomsky, the leading
anti-war figure of the later 20th century. It is also highly unlikely
that he would resort to a Nazi analogy. And unthinkable that he owns a gun.
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=IUGomzBPBi4C&pg=PA230&lpg=PA230&dq="when+words+like+dialectics+come+along"
Unfortunately the page before is "not included," so the context is unavailable.
It might explain why he was quoting Goering. It seems to be within an
attack on Marxism, odd for an Idealistic Socialist who before 1948 looked to a secular, integrated Arab-Jewish state in Palestine.

_Very_ interesting that your Mr Fisk had no problem changing "revolver" to
"gun" in the supposed quote (if he did in fact quote that passage).

The copyright page of that particular edition suggests it's a pirated
Indian edition, from 2002, of a collection of essays, but the relevant
part of the ToC is also not included.
Richard Tobin
2018-10-12 10:21:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=IUGomzBPBi4C&pg=PA230&lpg=PA230&dq="when+words+like+dialectics+come+along"
The copyright page of that particular edition suggests it's a pirated
Indian edition
Where do you get the idea that it's pirated? It's an Indian edition,
and the copyright page looks perfectly normal.

-- Richard
Peter T. Daniels
2018-10-12 14:02:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=IUGomzBPBi4C&pg=PA230&lpg=PA230&dq="when+words+like+dialectics+come+along"
The copyright page of that particular edition suggests it's a pirated
Indian edition
Where do you get the idea that it's pirated? It's an Indian edition,
and the copyright page looks perfectly normal.
Because Indian editions of Western books are usually far cheaper than the
originals, badly produced on cheap paper. Have licenses been issued, are
royalties paid?
Richard Tobin
2018-10-12 14:34:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Richard Tobin
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=IUGomzBPBi4C&pg=PA230&lpg=PA230&dq="when+words+like+dialectics+come+along"
The copyright page of that particular edition suggests it's a pirated
Indian edition
Where do you get the idea that it's pirated? It's an Indian edition,
and the copyright page looks perfectly normal.
Because Indian editions of Western books are usually far cheaper than the
originals, badly produced on cheap paper. Have licenses been issued, are
royalties paid?
It's a Penguin book, published by Penguin Books India. "Published by
arrangement with The New York Press, New York". It has an ISBN number
and you can order it from Amazon:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Understanding-Power-Noam-Chomsky/dp/0143029916

Do you think all books published in India are pirated?

-- Richard
Peter T. Daniels
2018-10-12 14:56:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Richard Tobin
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=IUGomzBPBi4C&pg=PA230&lpg=PA230&dq="when+words+like+dialectics+come+along"
The copyright page of that particular edition suggests it's a pirated
Indian edition
Where do you get the idea that it's pirated? It's an Indian edition,
and the copyright page looks perfectly normal.
Because Indian editions of Western books are usually far cheaper than the
originals, badly produced on cheap paper. Have licenses been issued, are
royalties paid?
It's a Penguin book, published by Penguin Books India. "Published by
arrangement with The New York Press, New York". It has an ISBN number
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Understanding-Power-Noam-Chomsky/dp/0143029916
Do you think all books published in India are pirated?
Not the ones created in India.
J. J. Lodder
2018-10-13 10:04:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Richard Tobin
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=IUGomzBPBi4C&pg=PA230&lpg=PA230&dq="whe
n+words+like+dialectics+come+along"
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Richard Tobin
The copyright page of that particular edition suggests it's a pirated
Indian edition
Where do you get the idea that it's pirated? It's an Indian edition,
and the copyright page looks perfectly normal.
Because Indian editions of Western books are usually far cheaper than the
originals, badly produced on cheap paper. Have licenses been issued, are
royalties paid?
It's a Penguin book, published by Penguin Books India. "Published by
arrangement with The New York Press, New York". It has an ISBN number
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Understanding-Power-Noam-Chomsky/dp/0143029916
Do you think all books published in India are pirated?
There used to be 'not for sale in the UK' printed somewhere on them,
since they bought the copyright for sale in India only.
Guess that no longer works so well,

Jan
Tak To
2018-10-12 16:05:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=IUGomzBPBi4C&pg=PA230&lpg=PA230&dq="when+words+like+dialectics+come+along"
The copyright page of that particular edition suggests it's a pirated
Indian edition
Where do you get the idea that it's pirated? It's an Indian edition,
and the copyright page looks perfectly normal.
Because Indian editions of Western books are usually far cheaper than the
originals, badly produced on cheap paper. Have licenses been issued, are
royalties paid?
Probably yes but at a lower rate.

Many of my high school textbooks were special editions for
students in poor countries.
--
Tak
----------------------------------------------------------------+-----
Tak To ***@alum.mit.eduxx
--------------------------------------------------------------------^^
[taode takto ~{LU5B~}] NB: trim the xx to get my real email addr
Peter T. Daniels
2018-10-12 16:25:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Tak To
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=IUGomzBPBi4C&pg=PA230&lpg=PA230&dq="when+words+like+dialectics+come+along"
The copyright page of that particular edition suggests it's a pirated
Indian edition
Where do you get the idea that it's pirated? It's an Indian edition,
and the copyright page looks perfectly normal.
Because Indian editions of Western books are usually far cheaper than the
originals, badly produced on cheap paper. Have licenses been issued, are
royalties paid?
Probably yes but at a lower rate.
Many of my high school textbooks were special editions for
students in poor countries.
Before 1972 (or a little later, with normalization), Taiwan was not part
of any international copyright conventions, and linguistics books could
be had (though not legally imported) for a song. I have one of Pike's
that way.
Quinn C
2018-10-12 17:35:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tak To
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=IUGomzBPBi4C&pg=PA230&lpg=PA230&dq="when+words+like+dialectics+come+along"
The copyright page of that particular edition suggests it's a pirated
Indian edition
Where do you get the idea that it's pirated? It's an Indian edition,
and the copyright page looks perfectly normal.
Because Indian editions of Western books are usually far cheaper than the
originals, badly produced on cheap paper. Have licenses been issued, are
royalties paid?
Probably yes but at a lower rate.
Many of my high school textbooks were special editions for
students in poor countries.
Before 1972 (or a little later, with normalization), Taiwan was not part
of any international copyright conventions, and linguistics books could
be had (though not legally imported) for a song. I have one of Pike's
that way.
Even in late 1980s, my South Korean fellow student suggested he could
get any math textbook for a fraction of the price at home.
--
The only BS around here is butternut squash, one of the dozens of
varieties of squash I grow. I hope you like squash.
-- Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt, S01E10
Tak To
2018-10-13 08:40:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Quinn C
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tak To
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=IUGomzBPBi4C&pg=PA230&lpg=PA230&dq="when+words+like+dialectics+come+along"
The copyright page of that particular edition suggests it's a pirated
Indian edition
Where do you get the idea that it's pirated? It's an Indian edition,
and the copyright page looks perfectly normal.
Because Indian editions of Western books are usually far cheaper than the
originals, badly produced on cheap paper. Have licenses been issued, are
royalties paid?
Probably yes but at a lower rate.
Many of my high school textbooks were special editions for
students in poor countries.
Before 1972 (or a little later, with normalization), Taiwan was not part
of any international copyright conventions, and linguistics books could
be had (though not legally imported) for a song. I have one of Pike's
that way.
Even in late 1980s, my South Korean fellow student suggested he could
get any math textbook for a fraction of the price at home.
Those were probably legitimate international student editions,
as were my high school textbooks in Hong Kong.

It was said that Taiwan deliberately helped the book pirateers
because affordable textbooks was thought to be of the highest
national interest. There could be some truth to that because
while Taiwan had some nominal copyright laws, the right to
make Chinese translations was specifically excluded. As things
turned out, the major beneficiaries were the publishers of
(translated) pirated Japanese manga/anime and porn.

And eventually there came a series of reforms resulting in a
more normal situation.
--
Tak
----------------------------------------------------------------+-----
Tak To ***@alum.mit.eduxx
--------------------------------------------------------------------^^
[taode takto ~{LU5B~}] NB: trim the xx to get my real email addr
Tak To
2018-10-13 04:19:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tak To
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=IUGomzBPBi4C&pg=PA230&lpg=PA230&dq="when+words+like+dialectics+come+along"
The copyright page of that particular edition suggests it's a pirated
Indian edition
Where do you get the idea that it's pirated? It's an Indian edition,
and the copyright page looks perfectly normal.
Because Indian editions of Western books are usually far cheaper than the
originals, badly produced on cheap paper. Have licenses been issued, are
royalties paid?
Probably yes but at a lower rate.
Many of my high school textbooks were special editions for
students in poor countries.
Before 1972 (or a little later, with normalization), Taiwan was not part
of any international copyright conventions, and linguistics books could
be had (though not legally imported) for a song. I have one of Pike's
that way.
I got a pirated set of the Dai Kan-Wa Jiten (aka the Morohashi)
in the 1980's. It was probably illegal in Taiwan by then.
--
Tak
----------------------------------------------------------------+-----
Tak To ***@alum.mit.eduxx
--------------------------------------------------------------------^^
[taode takto ~{LU5B~}] NB: trim the xx to get my real email addr
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2018-10-13 10:40:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tak To
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=IUGomzBPBi4C&pg=PA230&lpg=PA230&dq="when+words+like+dialectics+come+along"
The copyright page of that particular edition suggests it's a pirated
Indian edition
Where do you get the idea that it's pirated? It's an Indian edition,
and the copyright page looks perfectly normal.
Because Indian editions of Western books are usually far cheaper than the
originals, badly produced on cheap paper. Have licenses been issued, are
royalties paid?
Probably yes but at a lower rate.
Many of my high school textbooks were special editions for
students in poor countries.
Before 1972 (or a little later, with normalization), Taiwan was not part
of any international copyright conventions, and linguistics books could
be had (though not legally imported) for a song. I have one of Pike's
that way.
You smuggled it in?
--
athel
Peter T. Daniels
2018-10-13 14:05:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tak To
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=IUGomzBPBi4C&pg=PA230&lpg=PA230&dq="when+words+like+dialectics+come+along"
The copyright page of that particular edition suggests it's a pirated
Indian edition
Where do you get the idea that it's pirated? It's an Indian edition,
and the copyright page looks perfectly normal.
Because Indian editions of Western books are usually far cheaper than the
originals, badly produced on cheap paper. Have licenses been issued, are
royalties paid?
Probably yes but at a lower rate.
Many of my high school textbooks were special editions for
students in poor countries.
Before 1972 (or a little later, with normalization), Taiwan was not part
of any international copyright conventions, and linguistics books could
be had (though not legally imported) for a song. I have one of Pike's
that way.
You smuggled it in?
Nope, found it in a usedbook store. Didn't investigate the copyright
page (which has "printed in" or something like that) until later. Also
not a "real" cover.

Sam Plusnet
2018-10-12 20:17:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=IUGomzBPBi4C&pg=PA230&lpg=PA230&dq="when+words+like+dialectics+come+along"
The copyright page of that particular edition suggests it's a pirated
Indian edition
Where do you get the idea that it's pirated? It's an Indian edition,
and the copyright page looks perfectly normal.
Because Indian editions of Western books are usually far cheaper than the
originals, badly produced on cheap paper. Have licenses been issued, are
royalties paid?
If I listen, very very carefully I can hear Charles Dickens chuckling in
his grave.
--
Sam Plusnet
Peter T. Daniels
2018-10-12 20:48:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Sam Plusnet
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Richard Tobin
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=IUGomzBPBi4C&pg=PA230&lpg=PA230&dq="when+words+like+dialectics+come+along"
The copyright page of that particular edition suggests it's a pirated
Indian edition
Where do you get the idea that it's pirated? It's an Indian edition,
and the copyright page looks perfectly normal.
Because Indian editions of Western books are usually far cheaper than the
originals, badly produced on cheap paper. Have licenses been issued, are
royalties paid?
If I listen, very very carefully I can hear Charles Dickens chuckling in
his grave.
I finally got around to starting to read *From Holmes to Sherlock*, a
biography of those who were responsible for his origin and development.
It seems Conan Doyle and Oscar Wilde were the very first British authors
to benefit from the US joining one of the international copyright
conventions. (The two of them got along famously, BTW.)

It's a 400+-page book translated from the Swedish, very skillfully. It
opens with the meeting at which the series *Elementary* was first pitched.
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2018-10-12 08:08:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Richard Tobin
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Steve Hayes
par excellence, complained to a French newspaper last year that “when
I hear words like ‘dialectic’ or ‘hermeneutic’ and other
pseudo-profundities, then, like Goering, I reach for my gun”…
That is _immensely_ unlikely to have been spoken by Chomsky, the leading
anti-war figure of the later 20th century. It is also highly unlikely
that he would resort to a Nazi analogy. And unthinkable that he owns a gun.
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=IUGomzBPBi4C&pg=PA230&lpg=PA230&dq="when+words+like+dialectics+come+along"
Sometimes the _immensely_ unlikely turns out to be true. But don't be
unkind, PTD doesn't like attention to be drawn to his errors.

In any case, however unreadable Chomsky's writings on linguistics may
be, his political writings are easy to read.
--
athel
Mack A. Damia
2018-10-11 15:48:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thu, 11 Oct 2018 05:13:38 +0200, Steve Hayes
Post by Steve Hayes
Noam Chomsky, the plain-speaking philosopher and cognitive scientist
par excellence, complained to a French newspaper last year that “when
I hear words like ‘dialectic’ or ‘hermeneutic’ and other
pseudo-profundities, then, like Goering, I reach for my gun”…
https://t.co/NoRMuaFCLC
"(blah...blah) I reach for my gun."

"Hanns Johst (8 July 1890 – 23 November 1978) was a German poet and
playwright, directly aligned with Nazi philosophy, as a member of the
officially approved writers’ organisations in the Third Reich. The
statement “When I hear the word culture, I reach for my gun”,
variously misattributed to Himmler, Goebbels and Göring, was in fact a
corrupted version of a line in his play Schlageter." (Wiki)
Quinn C
2018-10-11 21:45:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Steve Hayes
Noam Chomsky, the plain-speaking philosopher
Who that?
--
If Helen Keller is alone in the forest and falls down, does she
make a sound?
Quinn C
2018-10-12 21:20:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Quinn C
Post by Steve Hayes
Noam Chomsky, the plain-speaking philosopher
Who that?
| My show is a little bit silly, and a
| Little bit pretentious, so like
| Shakespeare's willy or
| Noam Chomsky wearing a strap-on
|
| It's also a little bit gay, and a
| Little bit offensive, like
| Thanksgiving Day or
| Noam Chomsky wearing a strap-on

-- Bo Burnham

Why Noam Chomsky? Because he's plain-spoken? Hardly.
--
Learning the rules that govern intelligible speech is an
inculcation into normalized language, where the price of not
conforming is the loss of intelligibility itself.
-- Judith Butler
db
2018-10-12 13:02:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Noam Chomsky, the plain-speaking philosopher and cognitive scientist par
excellence, complained to a French newspaper last year that “when I hear
words like ‘dialectic’ or ‘hermeneutic’ and other pseudo-profundities,
then, like Goering, I reach for my gun”…
I agree with him on those words, beloved by
sociologists, but this is one of the silliest things
he has said. I usually like everything he says. I
would be surprised if he even owns a gun.
--
Dieter Britz
Jerry Friedman
2018-10-12 17:48:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by db
Noam Chomsky, the plain-speaking philosopher and cognitive scientist par
excellence, complained to a French newspaper last year that “when I hear
words like ‘dialectic’ or ‘hermeneutic’ and other pseudo-profundities,
then, like Goering, I reach for my gun”…
I agree with him on those words, beloved by
sociologists, but this is one of the silliest things
he has said. I usually like everything he says. I
would be surprised if he even owns a gun.
Just a figure of speech. He means his attitude becomes indifferent
or even hostile. He no more owns a gun than has any liking for
Goering.

By the way, Fisk misquoted Chomsky, who misquoted Hanns Johst. I'd say
Chomsky had more excuse, since he seems to have been talking rather
than writing. You can read what Chomsky said at the link Richard
Tobin provided.

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=IUGomzBPBi4C&pg=PA230

The meaning isn't really different.
--
Jerry Frierdman
Colonel Edmund J. Burke
2018-10-13 12:57:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Steve Hayes
Noam Chomsky, the plain-speaking philosopher and cognitive scientist
par excellence, complained to a French newspaper last year that “when
I hear words like ‘dialectic’ or ‘hermeneutic’ and other
pseudo-profundities, then, like Goering, I reach for my gun”…
http:niggermania.com
Steve sucks nigger dicks.
Loading...