python is going to die! =(

A

Alex Martelli

Tim Roberts said:
Second, "their" is allowed as a singular pronoun only in those cases where
a gender-specific pronoun is called for, but the gender is unclear or would
be sexist. Instead of "Everyone brought his Python manual," we are now
allowed to say "Everyone brought their Python manual."

Sorry, but I think you're being too restrictive. More impressively, so
does one William Shakespeare (Comedy of Errors):
"""
There's not a man I meet but doth salute me,
As if I were their well-acquainted friend.
"""
See? "a man" ... "their".

And the author of another of the masterpieces of English, the "King
James' Bible" (Matthew 18:35):
"...if ye from your hearts forgive not every one his brother their
trespasses..."
See? "brother" <-> "their".

While most uses of singular "their" will be connected to gender
indeterminacy, I agree with "Henry Churchyard's linguistics page",
specifically with his subpage on the subject at
<http://www.crossmyt.com/hc/linghebr/austheir.html>, that:
"""
unspecified gender is actually neither a necessary or sufficient
condition for use of singular "their"
"""

Churchyard gives specific examples from Austen and Shakespeare and
argues cogently:
"""
It's also interesting that in several of the examples (they are pointed
out in the list), singular "their" refers to each of several women, and
so was not used to express gender-neutrality. The reason for this is
that singular "their" can serve as a general way of expressing
indefiniteness, which need not have anything whatever to do with
gender-neutrality.
"""


Alex
 
T

Tim Churches

Sorry, but I think you're being too restrictive. More impressively, so
does one William Shakespeare (Comedy of Errors):
"""
There's not a man I meet but doth salute me,
As if I were their well-acquainted friend.
"""
See? "a man" ... "their".

And the author of another of the masterpieces of English, the "King
James' Bible" (Matthew 18:35):
"...if ye from your hearts forgive not every one his brother their
trespasses..."
See? "brother" <-> "their".

Of course, William Shakespeare was the author, or at least the
translator, or one of the translators, of the King James Bible (KJB),
evidenced by the fact that in Psalm 46, the 46th word from the beginning
is 'shake' and the 46th word from the end (excluding the final,
obligatory "Selah") is 'spear'. Shakespeare was 46 years of age in 1611
when the KJB was first published. You can verify this here:

http://www.cforc.com/kjv/Psalms/46.html

This factoid was mentioned in a review by Martin Gardiner of that very
rare tome, "Dr Matrix's Numerological Concordance to the King James
Bible", which appeared in the "Mathematical Diversions" section of the
Scientific American magazine some time in the 1970s or early 1980s (as I
dimly recall).

--

Tim C

PGP/GnuPG Key 1024D/EAF993D0 available from keyservers everywhere
or at http://members.optushome.com.au/tchur/pubkey.asc
Key fingerprint = 8C22 BF76 33BA B3B5 1D5B EB37 7891 46A9 EAF9 93D0
 
A

Alex Martelli

Steve Holden said:
Well Linguistics isn't Language.

Of course not, it's the _study_ of language. A linguist, for example,
need not be a very powerful and engaging writer, or speaker -- much like
a sports trainer need not be a very fast runner, or swimmer. But, if
you want to enhance your sporting abilities, you may still be better off
with the advice of somebody who studies the effects of various
combinations of diet and exercise, rather than with the advice of
somebody else, who just happens to be able to run a four-minute mile...

Of course, linguistics has long been split between prescriptive and
descriptive orientations. The long-term trend is definitely away from
the prescriptive (which centuries ago used to rule supreme) and towards
the descriptive (which isn't controversial any more, as soon as you get
into the actual professional practice -- peer-reviewed journals, etc).
How you "should" express yourself, after all, depends on your purposes;
the best a linguist can do is elucidate for you the likely consequences
of a stylistic or grammatical choice. It's not an issue of "who ya
gonna call?" being ``better'' or ``worse'' than "whom are you going to
contact?"... if you understand the contexts in which either way of
expression is going to be clearer, how they're going to affect your
audience, and so on, you can _choose_ effectively between them.


Alex
 
A

Ann

Anna Martelli Ravenscroft said:
Sorry, Christos. Alex was correct: "its" is the appropriate usage here.
"it's" is a contraction of "it is", and NOT the possessive form of it.
Furthermore, Alex was quite kind in *not* correcting the mismatch
between the singular form of the verb "is" and the plural noun "points".
I, otoh, am not so generous.

The sentence *should* have read:
"Well, not to feed the troll, but there are a few relevant points in its
posting."

Anna (pedants-r-us) Martelli


Anna,
Just wondering, which one are you:
ped·ant (pèd¹nt) noun
1. One who pays undue attention to book learning and formal rules.
2. One who exhibits one's learning or scholarship ostentatiously.
3. Obsolete. A schoolmaster.
Regards,
Ann
 
A

Alex Martelli

Ann said:
Anna,
Just wondering, which one are you:
ped·ant (pèd'nt) noun
1. One who pays undue attention to book learning and formal rules.
2. One who exhibits one's learning or scholarship ostentatiously.
3. Obsolete. A schoolmaster.

I think Merriam-Webster for once captures a nuance better than American
Heritage (with definition 2c, "a formalist or precisionist in
teaching"). The "undue" connotation, while popular, is not universal.
More interestingly, one might infer a desire to recapture for positive
self-identification a word that has acquired negative connotations in
popular use. Perhaps the best-known such fight currently going on is
for the word "hacker", but, after all, such _is_ the history of quite a
few other words... consider "gothic" and "baroque"...


Alex
 
J

JanC

Alex Martelli schreef:
More interestingly, one might infer a desire to recapture for positive
self-identification a word that has acquired negative connotations in
popular use. Perhaps the best-known such fight currently going on is
for the word "hacker", but, after all, such _is_ the history of quite a
few other words... consider "gothic" and "baroque"...

Well, if you go to a "gothic" record store, you'll find one or more racks
labeled "medieval", which in reality contains music that's mostly based on
"early renaissance" music... ;-)
 
A

Alex Martelli

JanC said:
Alex Martelli schreef:


Well, if you go to a "gothic" record store, you'll find one or more racks
labeled "medieval", which in reality contains music that's mostly based on
"early renaissance" music... ;-)

Oh, definitely. Part of the problem, of course, is that the boundary
between the middle ages and the renaissance is anything but the sharp
hard line most people appear to believe; of course, Johan Huizinga first
made this point (although it wasn't the one he mostly _intended_ to
make...) *generations* ago -- and I gather there's a reasonably recent
(and quite good, I've heard!) re-translation of his masterpiece, "The
Autumn of the Middle Ages", into English (the previous translation had
been titled "The Waning of the Middle Ages" instead).

Some late medieval / early renaissance developments in Central and
Northern Italy, in particular, show up the transition quite sharply.
Our successful merchants were laying the basis of modern capitalism
(based on such revolutionary tools as "arabic numbers", double-entry
book-keeping, letters of credit, banks, ...), but at the same time had
an account in their books for "messer Domeneddio" ("mister the Lord
God"), treated as a partner in their enterprises, to which they recorded
tithes just as shares of profits were recorded to other partners. The
three great authors who can be credited with creating the Italian
language (Dante Alighieri, Petrarca, Boccaccio) were all humanists --
but Dante was also a theologian, and a scholar very much in the late
medieval mold, while Petrarca was also a merchant and a mystic, and
Boccaccio (as far as we know, since he destroyed all poetry he had
written, leaving only prose) was entirely rooted in the human reality of
this world and had no interest in writing about angels or demons...

So, music no doubt went through a similarly hard-to-call transition
(even though it's harder to trace than finance, poetry, fiction). So
did other fields, after all: for example, the beautiful plate armor that
most people associate with "medieval knights" is in fact almost entirely
from the renaissance (at least in Italy... the renaissance came later to
other parts!), a transient attempt to ward off the firearms (and
effective use of pole weapons and arrows by disciplined infantry) that
were spelling the end of the time in which heavy cavalry ruled the
battlefields of Western Europe.

All in all, I find the confusion involved in calling early renaissance
music "medieval" quite understandable and mostly forgivable. Nothing
like the _huge_ distortion implied by calling _classical_ music the
music made by _romantic_ composers whose main ideological thrust was a
rebellion *against* the aesthetics and ideology of the classical
movement... and yet that's a horror that has long been perpetrated by
all manners of music publishers and stores, isn't it?!


Alex
 
A

Anna Martelli Ravenscroft

Alex said:
All in all, I find the confusion involved in calling early renaissance
music "medieval" quite understandable and mostly forgivable. Nothing
like the _huge_ distortion implied by calling _classical_ music the
music made by _romantic_ composers whose main ideological thrust was a
rebellion *against* the aesthetics and ideology of the classical
movement... and yet that's a horror that has long been perpetrated by
all manners of music publishers and stores, isn't it?!

They excel at mixing and matching...

Look at all the "genre" listings for Leonard Cohen. Or the mix-up of
Rock-a-billy, Bluegrass, Folk, and Country as all being "country" music.
[shudder]

Anna
 
A

Aahz

Of course, linguistics has long been split between prescriptive and
descriptive orientations. The long-term trend is definitely away from
the prescriptive (which centuries ago used to rule supreme) and towards
the descriptive (which isn't controversial any more, as soon as you get
into the actual professional practice -- peer-reviewed journals, etc).
How you "should" express yourself, after all, depends on your purposes;
the best a linguist can do is elucidate for you the likely consequences
of a stylistic or grammatical choice. It's not an issue of "who ya
gonna call?" being ``better'' or ``worse'' than "whom are you going
to contact?"... if you understand the contexts in which either way of
expression is going to be clearer, how they're going to affect your
audience, and so on, you can _choose_ effectively between them.

"Contact is not a verb under this roof."
 
N

Nigel Rowe

Aahz said:
"Contact is not a verb under this roof."

Why not?


Main Entry: 2. con·tact Pronunciation Guide
Pronunciation: ", knt-, känt-
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): -ed/-ing/-s
transitive verb : to bring into contact : enter or be in contact with: a :
to press against : MEET, TOUCH <brake shoes contact the inside diameter of
the drum> : JOIN <where the line of ordinary low water ... directly
contacted the open sea -- U.S.Code> b : to make connection with : get in
communication with : REACH -- used often where the means is not precisely
specified <contact your local dealer> <the salesman contacted a few
prospects> c : to talk or confer with : INTERVIEW : apply to : APPROACH
<the first company you contact may not ... use your services -- W.J.Reilly>
<the department ... was contacted to learn of availability and costs --
R.C.Emery>
intransitive verb : to make contact <the point at which the two surfaces
contact>

Citation format for this entry:
"contact." Webster's Third New International Dictionary, Unabridged.
Merriam-Webster, 2002. http://unabridged.merriam-webster.com (5 Oct. 2004).
 
H

Harald Armin Massa

Alex,
Sorry, but I think you're being too restrictive. More impressively, so
does one William Shakespeare (Comedy of Errors):
"""
There's not a man I meet but doth salute me,
As if I were their well-acquainted friend.
"""
See? "a man" ... "their".

I understand that "their" is quite valuable in English Language. May
it be a good candidate to replace @ as a decorator-keyword?

class fishandchips(object):
their classmethod
def salute(self):
print "hello"

their best greetings,

Harald
 
D

David Rush

Ville Vainio said:
David> How? I'm feeling awfully let down that the appearance of
David> the Eclipse community does not seem to match the reality.

That happened to me too. My hope was rekindled when I tried the recent
PyDev and saw that CDT got code compention working in C++. And some
other things. Eclipse needs to do a lot of growing up, but at least it
seems to *want* to grow up - unlike the grumpy old grandad that emacs
has become.

Well, you ought to listen to yer ould grandpa, yeh might learn summat.
Emacs/XEmacs is in *really* good shape for a program of its age. We'll
just have to see how Eclipse weathers the years.

And my apologies for cluttering up the Python world with my Emacs rant.
Blame groups.google; I actually didn't notice that I was in a ... ahem
.... less than apropriate ng. ANybody know where I can have a good flaming
Emacs vs Eclipse row that the Eclipse people might win? I'd like someone to
convince/educate me back into using it, cause right now Eclpise is just a
time-waster for me.

david rush
 
V

Ville Vainio

David> Well, you ought to listen to yer ould grandpa, yeh might
David> learn summat.

I've been a heavy-ish emacs user for, what, 10 years. The problem for
me is *unlearning* the stuff.

David> ... less than apropriate ng. ANybody know where I can have
David> a good flaming Emacs vs Eclipse row that the Eclipse people
David> might win? I'd like someone to convince/educate me back
David> into using it, cause right now Eclpise is just a
David> time-waster for me.

comp.emacs, right now.
 
G

G. S. Hayes

Ville Vainio said:
David> I do see the possibility, but the Eclipse community is
David> going to have to more eagerly embrace the non-Java world.

Indeed. I think we just need to give it some time. As it stands, the
potential for the passing of time to actually amounting to something
seems much better for Eclipse than it appears to be for Emacs.

Unless Eclipse will run on terminal it's not really an option for a
lot of developers. I know I've done a substantial amount of my dev
work on remote servers via ssh at each of my last 3 jobs (mostly at
Web/Web services companies, one data mining/visualization firm). The
beautiful thing about Vim (the same would apply to Emacs) is that
it'll run with all kinds of fancy bells and whistles (language/context
sensitive menus and syntax highlighting/tooltips/etc) when I'm running
on the local desktop, but I don't lose most of the core functionality
when I do some work on terminal. Help text may pop up in the status
bar instead of tooltips, but it essentially "feels" like the same
environment, with the same integration with my build and test systems,
etc.
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
473,995
Messages
2,570,228
Members
46,816
Latest member
nipsseyhussle

Latest Threads

Top