Advocate
 
  2  
Sat 12 Mar, 2011 10:23 am
Dumbest Tea Party sign:

"Keep the government out of my Medicare."
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Sat 12 Mar, 2011 10:51 am
@Advocate,
Goes to show they are dumb, stupid, and clueless. That's what makes them dangerous; their politics is a direct contradiction in every way.

Their next demand will be "stay out of my social security."
parados
 
  3  
Sat 12 Mar, 2011 11:02 am
@cicerone imposter,
They showed that in the 90s when they were for the government shut down and then discovered it mean they didn't get their SS checks while the government was shut down.

Too stupid to realize the consequences since they think they are only making other people sacrifice.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  -2  
Sat 12 Mar, 2011 11:11 am
@parados,
parados wrote:
Quote:
fullest

So is this pronounced like "fuelist"?
I don 't pronounce it like fuel.




parados wrote:
How do you pronounce this word David?
Quote:
true

Shouldn't the ue be pronounced like "You eee"

Phonetics assigns the same sound to the same symbol at all times.
You can't change the way "u" is pronounced from one word to the next
if you are using phonetics David.
I have striven to illustrate the point
that paradigmatic English spelling is ALMOST perfectly fonetic, but not quite, as to a minority of words,
which remain atavistic throwbacks to more Germanic times in the history of English.
Not all English words have successfully evolved from Chaucerian English.

There r errors of reasoning (e.g., jabbing Ls into woud, shoud or coud or spelling letter F as ph)
that we need to bring into conformity with logic and efficiency.

Whoever leads this effort, in the end, and writes a fonetic dictionary
will need to decide how to resolve problems (not me).
Among those issues will be how acceptable it is
to deviate from designated standards; exceptions thereto.
For instance, we cannot spell "right" as rite, because that word
means a ceremony; i.e., it is already taken, in definition.
Maybe a double letter to distinguish one from the other?? Something ez?

Nothing that I do, writing in these fora, is final polishing of words.
For too many decades, I was part of the problem,
perpetuating the problem by the erroneous use of English,
being complicit in supporting the paradime.
I had to do that, and I was not distracted by fonetics.
I never told any of my stenografers to type foneticly.

(Most of the time), I don 't have to do that any more.
I 'm free



parados wrote:
If you wanted to use the correct phonetic spellings David
Have I adopted your criteria qua what is "correct" ?????




parados wrote:
(International phonetic symbols)
you would be "ju"
Full would be "fʊ l"
A real phonetic speller would never use the same vowel for those 2 words
but you do it all the time which only proves you aren't writing phonetically
or even making much of an attempt to do it.
I am not in a big hurry to accept your reasoning on this, Parados.
Whoever writes the first (or the last) fonetic dictionary
will need to decide whether to accept & preserve rules, or to reject
and begin the reasoning anew. He will be the judge of that, not me.
I 'm only calling attention to the problem n suggesting some better possible alternatives to it.
If I point out that someone has a flat tire,
that does not require me to fix it for him.



parados wrote:
Then there is this -

The real problem with phonetic spelling David is that different dialects say words differently..

Car for example
In Boston might be pronounced "k^a"
In other parts of American it might be pronounced "kar"
And in Britian it would probably be "ka"
OK. I suggest that we accept English pronunciation as spoken by Ronald Reagan.
The most extreme variations from standard pronunciation
in America r probably the New England accent and the Southern drawl.
I propose that we avoid such variations.
The way that Network anchors speak (their pronunciation) is OK.
So it seems to me.





David
parados
 
  5  
Sat 12 Mar, 2011 11:50 am
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
I am not in a big hurry to accept your reasoning on this, Parados.
Whoever writes the first (or the last) fonetic dictionary
will need to decide whether to accept & preserve rules, or to reject
and begin the reasoning anew. He will be the judge of that, not me.

So you are just replacing a poor phonetic spelling system that is used by almost everyone with a poor phonetic spelling system that you just make up as you go along and it has no rules.

In other words you aren't doing phonetic spelling at all. You are just fighting the man.
plainoldme
 
  1  
Sat 12 Mar, 2011 12:19 pm
@parados,
david is not fighting the man, just acting out on his need for attention.
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Sat 12 Mar, 2011 12:25 pm
@plainoldme,
to be sure
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  -1  
Sat 12 Mar, 2011 01:02 pm
@plainoldme,
plainoldme wrote:

david is not fighting the man, just acting out on his need for attention.


Still more projection from the A2K master of it.
plainoldme
 
  1  
Sat 12 Mar, 2011 02:07 pm
@georgeob1,
So original!
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  -2  
Sat 12 Mar, 2011 02:08 pm
@parados,
David wrote:
I am not in a big hurry to accept your reasoning on this, Parados.
Whoever writes the first (or the last) fonetic dictionary
will need to decide whether to accept & preserve rules, or to reject
and begin the reasoning anew. He will be the judge of that, not me.
parados wrote:
So you are just replacing a poor phonetic spelling system
that is used by almost everyone with a poor phonetic spelling system
that you just make up as you go along and it has no rules.
To some extent, your charges r well founded.
I do not purport that MY use of fonetic spelling
is necessarily better than possible fonetic spelling rendered by anyone else.
I will not judge that without examining an alternate offering;
even then, its only my opinion, nothing OFFICIAL.

I suspect that it is probably better to begin with a new system
of reasoning, ab initio, rather than amend extant fonetic spelling.
Reasonable minds might disagree about that.





parados wrote:
In other words you aren't doing phonetic spelling at all. You are just fighting the man.
I don 't see it that way. That 's an odd way to express it.





David
parados
 
  1  
Sat 12 Mar, 2011 02:11 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
is necessarily better than possible fonetic spelling rendered by anyone else.
I will not judge that without examining an alternate offering;

It has been there for decades David..

http://www.englishbiz.co.uk/grammar/images/phonetic_alphabet.gif
OmSigDAVID
 
  -2  
Sat 12 Mar, 2011 02:17 pm
@plainoldme,
plainoldme wrote:
david is not fighting the man, just acting out on his need for attention.
U don 't know me well, at all.
To me, anonymity is an asset of great value.
If I were to successfully run for a high elected office,
I 'd feel sad about the unpleasant sacrifice of my anonymity.
I LIKE being able to walk in public without being recognized.
When I have nothing that I wanna say,
nothing that I consider worth saying, I enjoy remaining silent and unobtrusive. Its fun.
Running my mouth takes work n I am lazy. That 's fun too.





David
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  -2  
Sat 12 Mar, 2011 02:24 pm
@parados,
parados wrote:

Quote:
is necessarily better than possible fonetic spelling rendered by anyone else.
I will not judge that without examining an alternate offering;

It has been there for decades David..

http://www.englishbiz.co.uk/grammar/images/phonetic_alphabet.gif
Did I deny its existence ???
I don 't believe that I did.
I merely allowed for the possibility
that alternate schools of thawt might be better.

Don 't be an old stick-in-the-mud conservative.
Be open to new ideas.





David
parados
 
  1  
Sat 12 Mar, 2011 03:48 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Your idea isn't new David.

Spelling in a manner that is inconsistent with the spoken word is not a new idea David.
Spelling in a manner that is inconsistent with the standard dictionary spelling is also not new.
roger
 
  1  
Sat 12 Mar, 2011 04:07 pm
@parados,
I usually spell lizard with two zees. Instead of spitting it out from the front of the mouth, it starts in the back of the throat and sort of slithers out through the lips. I'm not planning to change.

Give me a few minutes and I might figure out what this has to do with the Tea Party.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Sat 12 Mar, 2011 04:09 pm
@roger,
lizzard = tea party?
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  0  
Sat 12 Mar, 2011 04:31 pm
@roger,
roger wrote:


Give me a few minutes and I might figure out what this has to do with the Tea Party.

Does this help?

http://filterednews.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/misspelled-tea-party-sign.jpg
http://vivatraining.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/tea-party-sign-41.png
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4025/4469683774_3df2501484_o.png
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Sat 12 Mar, 2011 04:53 pm
@parados,
I don't know where you dug up those pictures, but they are funny!
OmSigDAVID
 
  -2  
Sat 12 Mar, 2011 09:07 pm
@parados,
parados wrote:

Your idea isn't new David.

Spelling in a manner that is inconsistent with the spoken word is not a new idea David.
Spelling in a manner that is inconsistent with the standard dictionary spelling is also not new.
Have I committed myself to that criterion ?

My posts woud be disregarded more than thay r,
if I wrote everything NEW.
In point of fact, I endeavor not to overDO it.





David
parados
 
  1  
Sun 13 Mar, 2011 07:31 am
@OmSigDAVID,
Being lazy and not overdoing it also not new.

You are nothing but a conservative David even in your supposed attempt to be liberal you still end up being conservative.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 07/18/2024 at 01:05:00