[Cialug] [OT] Security and the browser

Thu Oct 23 15:13:16 CDT 2008

Wow... what a thread, I'm so flattered. Next time I'll say moot.

On Thu, 2008-10-23 at 15:10 -0500, Daniel A. Ramaley wrote:
> The Sapir-Worf hypothesis only partially explains how people think; 
> people are capable of thinking of things outside their language's 
> vocabulary. A well-known example is the German word "schadenfreude" 
> which means something like taking pleasure in the misfortune of 
> another. English doesn't have a single word with that meaning. But it 
> doesn't mean the concept is absent in English speakers' minds.
> 
> Oh, and the idea that the Inuit have 20 words for snow is not entirely 
> accurate. Many of the Eskimo languages are polysynthetic. Which means 
> that the grammar allows for building arbitrary new words on the fly. 
> Which means that they have an infinite number of words for snow, or 
> alternatively, that the concept of a specific number of words for snow 
> just doesn't make sense in those languages. Thinking they have 20 words 
> comes from a very Anglo-centric outsiders view of the Eskimo languages. 
> Here are a couple articles on the subject; Google can find many more:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eskimo_words_for_snow
> http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/263/what-are-the-nine-eskimo-words-for-snow
> 
> On Thursday October 23 2008 14:52, Ralph Kessel wrote:
> >Linguist Benjamin Lee Whorf  made an observation during the 1930's
> > that was collectively tagged the Whorf-Sapir hypothesis while working
> > in an environment with drums filled with gasoline were not
> > "flammable" but empty drums were. This to the view that
> > linguistic/semantic factors determine how we view the world, eg the
> > Eskimos/Inuit have over 20 words for snow. George Orwell, Adolph
> > Hitler, and others  picked up this concept with "Newspeak".  Of
> > course, our news media continuously pack new words and phrases into
> > our language.  "Multi-tasking" had a very specific and precise
> > meaning in computer science and now it is interpreted as doing
> > anything at the same time. (Something impossible except under quantum
> > mechanics).
> >
> >Check it out in the Wikipedia under the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis.
> >
> >----- Original Message ----
> >From: Barry Von Ahsen <barry at vonahsen.com>
> >To: Central Iowa Linux Users Group <cialug at cialug.org>
> >Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2008 1:00:57 PM
> >Subject: Re: [Cialug] [OT] Security and the browser
> >
> >inflammable means flammable?!?  what a country!
> >
> >-barry
> >
> >Josh More wrote:
> >> Just to take this really far off topic, I'd like to recommend that
> >> everyone participating in this conversation read "The Meaning of
> >> Everything: The Story of the Oxford English Dictionary"  (
> >> http://www.amazon.com/Meaning-Everything-Oxford-English-Dictionary/d
> >>p/019517500X/ ).
> >>
> >> It's very well written and fascinating, for those of us who
> >> appreciate language enough to quibble about it on a technology list.
> >>  :)
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -Josh More, RHCE, CISSP, NCLP, GIAC
> >>  morej at alliancetechnologies.net
> >>  515-245-7701
> >>
> >>>>> "Daniel A. Ramaley" <daniel.ramaley at drake.edu> 10/22/08 12:27 PM
> >>
> >> On Wednesday October 22 2008 12:04, Bryan Baker wrote:
> >>>> It's one of those things where some people use it incorrectly, it
> >>>> eventually becomes accepted practice to use it incorrectly.
> >>>
> >>> Exactly. It literally means to reduce by 1/10 and is now used as a
> >>> synonym for total destruction (an almost 180*spin).
> >>
> >> I think that's getting close to the difference between prescriptive
> >> and
> >>
> >> descriptive linguistics. I used to have a more prescriptive view of
> >> language. These days i think (probably as a result of learning some
> >> Japanese in a non-traditional program) that a descriptive view is
> >> better. Languages change over time; words change meaning and new
> >> grammar and vocabulary are developed while old are dropped.
> >>
> >> Prescriptivists will tend to think that language should be static
> >> and not change. I think prescriptivists probably would make better
> >> junior high language teachers since they are less accepting of
> >> "errors". Descriptivists who simply try to divine the existing rules
> >> of a language rather than enforcing some external rules are probably
> >> better
> >>
> >> at accepting the change of language over time.
> >>
> >> Perhaps slightly more on topic: so what does the word "hacker" mean?
> >> There's a good example of a word that has changed meaning, and did
> >> so in a very short period of time.
> >>
> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>---- Dan Ramaley                            Dial Center 118, Drake
> >> University
> >> Network Programmer/Analyst             2407 Carpenter Ave
> >> +1 515 271-4540                        Des Moines IA 50311 USA
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Cialug mailing list
> >> Cialug at cialug.org
> >> http://cialug.org/mailman/listinfo/cialug
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Cialug mailing list
> >> Cialug at cialug.org
> >> http://cialug.org/mailman/listinfo/cialug
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Cialug mailing list
> >Cialug at cialug.org
> >http://cialug.org/mailman/listinfo/cialug
> 
-- 
___
Dave J. Hala Jr.
President OSIS, Inc.
www.osis.us