If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Collecting experience
On Sat, 20 Feb 2010 12:36:00 -0600, "Mr. Jaggers"
lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote: For the record, that should be "reining in." Oops, wrong group. Let's see, that would be alt.english.usage. My bad. But try doing that over there and see how long you survive. Those guys will tear you one over a misplaced quotation mark or improper use of the pluperfect subjunctive. Welcome to Usenet. That really isn't so. The newsgroups alt.english.usage and alt.usage.english are my primary newsgroups. I read, and post in, other newsgroups, but those are the two that interest me the most. One of the most remarkable things about those two newsgroups is the high level of politeness. Flame wars are rare. If you wander into a.u.e., and find some rude remarks being exchanged, check the headers and you will find that the post is cross-posted to the sci.lang group (primarily linguists), and the rude exchange involves a sci.langer. Should you write "reign" for "rein" in a.u.e., someone might reply with "Oy!". That's a.u.e.-speak for "You've made an error". More likely, the reply will contain a pun or some good-humored wordplay at your expense. Reid would not fare well in a.u.e., though. Not because he mistreats pluperfect subjunctives, but because a) he'd bore the living daylights out of the regulars in the group, and, b) he thinks shifting goalposts is the required response to having an error pointed out. -- Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida |
Ads |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Collecting experience
tony cooper wrote:
On Sat, 20 Feb 2010 12:36:00 -0600, "Mr. Jaggers" lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote: For the record, that should be "reining in." Oops, wrong group. Let's see, that would be alt.english.usage. My bad. But try doing that over there and see how long you survive. Those guys will tear you one over a misplaced quotation mark or improper use of the pluperfect subjunctive. Welcome to Usenet. That really isn't so. The newsgroups alt.english.usage and alt.usage.english are my primary newsgroups. I read, and post in, other newsgroups, but those are the two that interest me the most. One of the most remarkable things about those two newsgroups is the high level of politeness. Flame wars are rare. If you wander into a.u.e., and find some rude remarks being exchanged, check the headers and you will find that the post is cross-posted to the sci.lang group (primarily linguists), and the rude exchange involves a sci.langer. Should you write "reign" for "rein" in a.u.e., someone might reply with "Oy!". That's a.u.e.-speak for "You've made an error". More likely, the reply will contain a pun or some good-humored wordplay at your expense. Reid would not fare well in a.u.e., though. Not because he mistreats pluperfect subjunctives, but because a) he'd bore the living daylights out of the regulars in the group, and, b) he thinks shifting goalposts is the required response to having an error pointed out. In all due honesty, I was only on those two usage groups for a short time, at the end of which I got my hiney chewed royally for my analysis of the proper sequencing of tenses/moods that was the subject of a query post. I did it as a relative newbie, from the point of a classically trained Latin scholar, and that was all it took. "But behold, there be they who, having a specialty, and admiring it in themselves, be jealous when a neighbor doth essay it, nor can abide it in them long." - Mark Twain James |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Collecting experience
On Sat, 20 Feb 2010 19:45:22 -0600, "Mr. Jaggers"
lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote: In all due honesty, I was only on those two usage groups for a short time, at the end of which I got my hiney chewed royally for my analysis of the proper sequencing of tenses/moods that was the subject of a query post. I did it as a relative newbie, from the point of a classically trained Latin scholar, and that was all it took. To give you an idea of how tolerant the group is, I would put the period at the end of that quote after the closing quotation mark in violation of the accepted American style. However, because I am consistent in this, no one has ever Oy'd me on it. It's regarded as a style choice. "But behold, there be they who, having a specialty, and admiring it in themselves, be jealous when a neighbor doth essay it, nor can abide it in them long." - Mark Twain -- Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Collecting experience
On Feb 20, 2:13*am, Reid Goldsborough
wrote: [snip] Look out, I have some actual numismatic content in my response. Just going to respond to a small part of your post, Reid. So I wound up focusing mostly on ancient Greek coins, more engaging to me in general than Roman coins. Just as Rome copied Greece with mythology, philosophy, science, architecture, and so on, it also copied Greek coins, only made them in general smaller, more often debased, and less attractive artistically. Well, that's your viewpoint, of course, but I personally tend to favor the Romans for my own collection. True, the Greeks had some of the most truly spectacular coins ever- I'm thinking especially of Syracusan dekadrachms and some other Sicilian coins- but those coins are priced pretty stratospherically. The more affordable Greek coins (let's say that "affordable" for purposes of this discussion is under $2-3 K per coin) are not so much more knock-your-socks-off than similarly priced Roman coins, especially the early Empire. Smaller is also not entirely true- the Romans issued mid- and large-sized bronzes a lot more regularly than most Greek city-states. (Okay, the Ptolemaic bronzes are pretty damn huge, but I'm talking about the general case. How many sestertius-sized bronzes of Athens, or Alexander, or the Seleukids, etc. do you see compared to Roman, well, sestertii?) The Romans, as a group, are a more coherent social- historic grouping than the "Greeks", at least as they are defined numismatically, and I find that backbone helpful in organizing a collection. The "Greek" series is so huge and varied that anyone undertaking it ends up with a group of several much smaller, better- defined collections (as you yourself have ended up in your collecting). Not that there's anything wrong with that, I just want to present an alternate viewpoint. As you know, I have made the Parthian series the biggest focus of my coin collecting, in terms of number, depth of collection, and percentage of collecting budget spent. I don't think that really contradicts what I said about "Greek" coins, since I don't consider the Parthians Greek. "Greek" in catalogues of ancient coins sometimes means little more than "not obviously Roman". The early Parthian coins do have good Hellenistic inscriptions, and sometimes Hellenistic portraits, but that changes over time. I challenge anyone to identify a uniquely Hellenistic attribute, or read a single word of Greek, on this late Parthian coin: http://www.parthia.com/coins/pdc_7235.jpg And if you still think I contradict myself, well, very well, I contradict myself. I am large, I contain multitudes. Rome also made the same mistake the U.S. has made over the past hundred years or so, in my view, by using human portraits as primary, obverse devices rather than more imaginative and inspirational symbolic or mythological figures. True, the Romans emphasized portraiture more than the classical Greeks (besides the late Hellenistic monarchs) but I think this is an important reflection of the nature of their respective societies. The Roman emperors were the truly central figures of their culture (or at least they tried their best to be), and the coinage reflects this. Early Imperial portraiture is quite attractive. (Though I have to agree in seeing little merit to, say, Constantinian and later coin portraits where you have to read the inscriptions to have the faintest clue who is being portrayed. Even most of the Parthians can be distinguished by portrait!) As for US coin portraits, I agree that, as a republic, we should not be putting actual portraits on our coins. Although at least we don't portray the current ruler, only previous deceased leaders, who are not directly associated with the current administration. Maybe they share somewhat the same function as the portraits of deities and heroes on classical Greek coins- paragons of particular virtues, rather than a reminder of governmental power like Roman Imperial portraits? Anyway, thanks for posting this rather long article, I enjoyed it even though I don't have time to reply to every part of it. -Robert A. DeRose, Jr. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Collecting experience
tony cooper wrote:
On Sat, 20 Feb 2010 19:45:22 -0600, "Mr. Jaggers" lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote: In all due honesty, I was only on those two usage groups for a short time, at the end of which I got my hiney chewed royally for my analysis of the proper sequencing of tenses/moods that was the subject of a query post. I did it as a relative newbie, from the point of a classically trained Latin scholar, and that was all it took. To give you an idea of how tolerant the group is, I would put the period at the end of that quote after the closing quotation mark in violation of the accepted American style. However, because I am consistent in this, no one has ever Oy'd me on it. It's regarded as a style choice. I've had a lot of surprises after reading the latest edition of the Chicago Manual of Style, which I received as a Christmas gift. A lot of the rules I learned in school have changed, it seems. For example, we were taught that one should always capitalize President when referring to the POTUS. Apparently that is as passé as "23 skiddoo". Or is it "skiddoo."? "Skiddoo?." Oh, I give up. James the Indecisive |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Collecting experience
Reid Goldsborough wrote:
On 2/20/2010 7:45 PM, in wrote: thanks. i wish i could read the whole thing. even as late as my childhood, halves circulated. i remembered having a walker when i was 8, that's why i collected them later. bust halves seem as varied as varieties of hi-tops. Someone talking coins in response to a post of mine about coins. Refreshing! Really. In stark contracts to the Bruce Remicks here. He says he "parodying" me. Funny. He's just being disruptive, and dully, with every post of his here, and many past posts, no different from countless others on Usenet, here as elsewhere, past and present, doing it because they can. One other dodo said the same thing, a few years ago, after creating a handle that consisted of my name and just disrupting thread after thead. That was high art in his mind too, that's how he defended himself after I figured out who he was. Will the real Bruce Remick please stand. James "To Tell the Truth" the Dull and Disruptive Dodo |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Collecting experience
"tony cooper" wrote in message ... To give you an idea of how tolerant the group is, I would put the period at the end of that quote after the closing quotation mark in violation of the accepted American style. However, because I am consistent in this, no one has ever Oy'd me on it. It's regarded as a style choice. It's that type of beeding-heart, feel-good liberalism that is destroying the written language. g |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Collecting experience
"Mr. Jaggers" lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote in message ... tony cooper wrote: On Sat, 20 Feb 2010 19:45:22 -0600, "Mr. Jaggers" lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote: In all due honesty, I was only on those two usage groups for a short time, at the end of which I got my hiney chewed royally for my analysis of the proper sequencing of tenses/moods that was the subject of a query post. I did it as a relative newbie, from the point of a classically trained Latin scholar, and that was all it took. To give you an idea of how tolerant the group is, I would put the period at the end of that quote after the closing quotation mark in violation of the accepted American style. However, because I am consistent in this, no one has ever Oy'd me on it. It's regarded as a style choice. I've had a lot of surprises after reading the latest edition of the Chicago Manual of Style, which I received as a Christmas gift. A lot of the rules I learned in school have changed, it seems. For example, we were taught that one should always capitalize President when referring to the POTUS. Apparently that is as passé as "23 skiddoo". Or is it "skiddoo."? "Skiddoo?." Oh, I give up. Be glad you didn't have to write according to the US Govt style manual. Talk about contrast in grammar, spelling, and punctuation we were taught in school. Plus some of the "style" usually would change according to the administration in power. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Collecting experience
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
rec.collecting.phonecards, rec.collecting.pins, rec.collecting.postal-history, rec.collecting.villages, rec.collecting.vinyl | YourTrafficBoost.com | Paper Money | 0 | August 26th 06 05:00 AM |
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) for Posting to rec.collecting.sport.* Hierarchy (including rec.collecting.cards.non-sports!) | P.A.Bines | Cards:- non-sport | 0 | January 14th 06 08:28 PM |
defining line between Collecting & Collecting to Sell? | Mr Black | Autographs | 8 | July 28th 05 03:33 AM |
rec.collecting.sport.baseball, rec.collecting.sport.hockey, rec.collecting.sport.football, rec.collecting.sport.basketball | SMCCI.com | Football (US) | 0 | April 12th 05 12:22 AM |
Collecting Plates? Collecting Commemorating Items? | JEFFREY PALLIN | General | 0 | June 18th 04 11:27 AM |