Re: Improving the WHOIS format
Dwayne Henderson <[email protected]> Sun, 15 Jan 2012 01:12:24 +0100
| Newsgroups | gmane.network.irc.irssi.user |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAOOO88Di4G6sMQsJdJVhdZk0c4oif9f9tFMGstV_2Lj7TmknvQ@mail.gmail.com> |
--0015175cd4f2db6e6f04b685f3b7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Again, your New York State Journal quote is a proper use of "join to". It'd be wrong saying "the toxine molecules join the receptors", because they're objects attaching themselves to each other. You can't describe the relationship between yourself and a group (which is what a channel is) as a joined-to one. By saying to "join to a table", you're saying you're attaching yourself to a table (physically, not emotionally), as in "I joined myself to the table with superglue". The Google count shows that the only particularly common phrases are "join us", "join a group" and "join me". The others are far too low to say anything about. As for the accuracy of Google itself, let's save that for another discussion. --Dwayne http://wearebuild.com +44(0)208 521 1040 (Vimeo<http://vimeo.com/wearebuild/videos> ) On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 7:49 PM, David Romano < [email protected]> wrote: > Dwayne Henderson wrote on Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 05:26:11AM MST: > > Pretty decent response David! Respect! > Thank you, Dwayne. Same to you! > > > You're right about 1 and 2. But from what I've seen, this happens more > > often than not if the acronym is pronouncable, unlike IRC. > Furthermore, > > joining it together with "name" just to be easier read by machines, I > > think, fails to address the fact that Irssi was designed for humans. > > Now that I think about it though, wouldn't "Real name" be more > > appropriate as it corresponds to Irssi's real_name? > What about IRC_name or IRC_real_name? Could that be a compromise between > humans and machines? Until, that is, we get our cybernetic brains. > > > By the way, dict is a tool that searches the world's most popular > > dictionaries and has nothing to do with /usr/share/dict/words. > Ah, wasn't aware of that, thanks! That reminds me, I've been meaning to > start > using surfraw [1] more. > > > I totally get how language changes over time due to popular culture > and > > what not, but we're talking about right here, right now. I'm no > > prescriptivist either. I mean, I speak ebonics most of the time. Nah > > mean? > Fo sho. > > > Your 1297 reference is irrelevant though. That "the soul is joined to > > his body" is a perfectly reasonable use of "join to" - as in becoming > > attached to something. > That's the sense that I took 'X is joined to too many channels', so I don't > see it as irrelevant. If it's because the subject in 'X is joined to too > many > channels' and in the 1297 quotation it's a thing, then the next quotation > uses > a person for both subject and the prepositional phrase: > > a1382 Bible (Wycliffite, E.V.) (Douce 369(1)) (1850) Job xli. 7 Oon > to > > oon is ioyned. > So I still do not see the use of 'join' with the preposition 'to' as a > misuse > in 'X is joined to too many channels'. > > > % googlecount "join us" > > "join us": 41,400,000 > > % googlecount "join to us" > > "join to us": 6,580 > > % googlecount "join our table" > > "join our table": 1,110 > > % googlecount "join to our table" > > ? "join to our table": 1 > > % googlecount "join a group" > > "join a group": 646,000 > > % googlecount "join to a group" > > "join to a group": 876 > > % googlecount "join a channel" > > "join a channel": 4,300 > > % googlecount "join to a channel" > > "join to a channel": 122 > > % googlecount "join me" > > "join me": 3,260,000 > > % googlecount "join to me" > > "join to me": 1,830 > > % googlecount "join yourself to me" > > "join yourself to me": 15 > > "Everyone join to me! About Me: My name is Natasha. I'm 20 years old > > girl who like ..." > > Right. Next result. > I don't have googlecount (which my be a one-liner Perl script for all I > know) > so I went to web browser route: > "joins to too many": 6 > "joining to too many": 102 > "join to too many": 915 > "joined to too many": 1,850 > The first hit for the last one is from the New York State Journal of > Medicine: "If the toxine acts on the cell and too many toxine molecules are > joined to too many receptors." But the real problem is thinking Google > counts > are valid for this kind of thing. [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] > > - David > > [1] http://surfraw.alioth.debian.org/ > [2] http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/004925.html > [3] http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/001837.html > [4] http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/001838.html > [5] http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=1992 > [6] http://blog.veronis.fr/2005/01/web-googles-counts-faked.html > > -- > David Romano .:. [email protected] > ---- > "For the fear of death is indeed the pretence of wisdom, and not real > wisdom, being a pretence of knowing the unknown; and no one knows > whether death, which men in their fear apprehend to be the greatest > evil, may not be the greatest good. Is not this ignorance of a > disgraceful sort, the ignorance which is the conceit that man knows what > he does not know?" > -- Socrates, The Apology by Plato > > --0015175cd4f2db6e6f04b685f3b7 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Again, your New York State Journal quote is a proper use of "join to&q= uot;.=20 It'd be wrong saying "the toxine molecules join the=20 receptors", because they're objects attaching themselves to each o= ther.<br><br>You can't describe the relationship between yourself and a= group (which=20 is what a channel is) as a joined-to one. By saying to "join to a tabl= e", you're saying you're attaching yourself to a table (physic= ally, not emotionally), as in "I joined myself to the table with super= glue".<br> <br>The Google count shows that the only particularly common phrases are "join us", "join a group" and "join me". The= others are far too low to=20 say anything about. As for the accuracy of Google itself, let's save=20 that for another discussion.<br><br>--Dwayne<br><a href=3D"http://wearebuil= d.com/" target=3D"_blank">http://wearebuild.com</a> <a href=3D"tel:%2B44%28= 0%29208%20521%201040" value=3D"+442085211040" target=3D"_blank">+44(0)208 5= 21 1040</a> (<a href=3D"http://vimeo.com/wearebuild/videos" target=3D"_blan= k">Vimeo</a>)<br> <br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 7:49 PM, David Roman= o <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:david.romano%2Birssi-users@gmail.= com" target=3D"_blank">[email protected]</a>></span> wr= ote:<br> <blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p= x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> Dwayne Henderson wrote on Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 05:26:11AM MST:<br> <div>> =A0 =A0Pretty decent response David! Respect!<br> </div>Thank you, Dwayne. Same to you!<br> <div><br> > =A0 =A0You're right about 1 and 2. But from what I've seen, th= is happens more<br> > =A0 =A0often than not if the acronym is pronouncable, unlike IRC. Furt= hermore,<br> > =A0 =A0joining it together with "name" just to be easier rea= d by machines, I<br> > =A0 =A0think, fails to address the fact that Irssi was designed for hu= mans.<br> > =A0 =A0Now that I think about it though, wouldn't "Real name&= quot; be more<br> > =A0 =A0appropriate as it corresponds to Irssi's real_name?<br> </div>What about IRC_name or IRC_real_name? Could that be a compromise betw= een<br> humans and machines? Until, that is, we get our cybernetic brains.<br> <div><br> > =A0 =A0By the way, dict is a tool that searches the world's most p= opular<br> > =A0 =A0dictionaries and has nothing to do with /usr/share/dict/words.<= br> </div>Ah, wasn't aware of that, thanks! That reminds me, I've been = meaning to start<br> using surfraw [1] more.<br> <div><br> > =A0 =A0I totally get how language changes over time due to popular cul= ture and<br> > =A0 =A0what not, but we're talking about right here, right now. I&= #39;m no<br> > =A0 =A0prescriptivist either. I mean, I speak ebonics most of the time= . Nah<br> > =A0 =A0mean?<br> </div>Fo sho.<br> <div><br> > =A0 =A0Your 1297 reference is irrelevant though. That "the soul i= s joined to<br> > =A0 =A0his body" is a perfectly reasonable use of "join to&q= uot; - as in becoming<br> > =A0 =A0attached to something.<br> </div>That's the sense that I took 'X is joined to too many channel= s', so I don't<br> see it as irrelevant. If it's because the subject in 'X is joined t= o too many<br> channels' and in the 1297 quotation it's a thing, then the next quo= tation uses<br> a person for both subject and the prepositional phrase:<br> <div>> =A0 =A0 =A0a1382 Bible (Wycliffite, E.V.) (Douce 369(1)) (1850) J= ob xli. 7 Oon to<br> > =A0 =A0 =A0oon is ioyned.<br> </div>So I still do not see the use of 'join' with the preposition = 'to' as a misuse<br> in 'X is joined to too many channels'.<br> <div><br> > =A0 =A0% googlecount "join us"<br> > =A0 =A0"join us": 41,400,000<br> > =A0 =A0% googlecount "join to us"<br> > =A0 =A0"join to us": 6,580<br> > =A0 =A0% googlecount "join our table"<br> > =A0 =A0"join our table": 1,110<br> > =A0 =A0% googlecount "join to our table"<br> </div>> =A0 =A0? "join to our table": 1<br> <div>> =A0 =A0% googlecount "join a group"<br> > =A0 =A0"join a group": 646,000<br> > =A0 =A0% googlecount "join to a group"<br> > =A0 =A0"join to a group": 876<br> > =A0 =A0% googlecount "join a channel"<br> > =A0 =A0"join a channel": 4,300<br> > =A0 =A0% googlecount "join to a channel"<br> > =A0 =A0"join to a channel": 122<br> > =A0 =A0% googlecount "join me"<br> > =A0 =A0"join me": 3,260,000<br> > =A0 =A0% googlecount "join to me"<br> > =A0 =A0"join to me": 1,830<br> > =A0 =A0% googlecount "join yourself to me"<br> > =A0 =A0"join yourself to me": 15<br> > =A0 =A0"Everyone join to me! About Me: My name is Natasha. I'= m 20 years old<br> > =A0 =A0girl who like ..."<br> > =A0 =A0Right. Next result.<br> </div>I don't have googlecount (which my be a one-liner Perl script for= all I know)<br> so I went to web browser route:<br> =A0 =A0"joins to too many": 6<br> =A0 =A0"joining to too many": 102<br> =A0 =A0"join to too many": 915<br> =A0 =A0"joined to too many": 1,850<br> The first hit for the last one is from the New York State Journal of<br> Medicine: "If the toxine acts on the cell and too many toxine molecule= s are<br> joined to too many receptors." But the real problem is thinking Google= counts<br> are valid for this kind of thing. [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]<br> <br> - David<br> <br> [1] <a href=3D"http://surfraw.alioth.debian.org/" target=3D"_blank">http://= surfraw.alioth.debian.org/</a><br> [2] <a href=3D"http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/%7Emyl/languagelog/archives/004925= .html" target=3D"_blank">http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archive= s/004925.html</a><br> [3] <a href=3D"http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/%7Emyl/languagelog/archives/001837= .html" target=3D"_blank">http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archive= s/001837.html</a><br> [4] <a href=3D"http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/%7Emyl/languagelog/archives/001838= .html" target=3D"_blank">http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archive= s/001838.html</a><br> [5] <a href=3D"http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=3D1992" target=3D"_b= lank">http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=3D1992</a><br> [6] <a href=3D"http://blog.veronis.fr/2005/01/web-googles-counts-faked.html= " target=3D"_blank">http://blog.veronis.fr/2005/01/web-googles-counts-faked= .html</a><br> <div><br> --<br> David Romano .:. <a href=3D"mailto:david.romano%[email protected]" ta= rget=3D"_blank">[email protected]</a><br> ----<br> </div>"For the fear of death is indeed the pretence of wisdom, and not= real<br> wisdom, being a pretence of knowing the unknown; and no one knows<br> whether death, which men in their fear apprehend to be the greatest<br> evil, may not be the greatest good. Is not this ignorance of a<br> disgraceful sort, the ignorance which is the conceit that man knows what<br= > he does not know?"<br> =A0 =A0-- Socrates, The Apology by Plato<br> <br> </blockquote></div><br> --0015175cd4f2db6e6f04b685f3b7--