RE: [OT] sentances with two meanings

Discussion in 'Python' started by Harvey Thomas, Jul 15, 2003.

  1. Colin S. Miller wrote
    > >
    > > Matthew 25:35 I was a stranger, and you took me in.

    > Care to enlighten us with the second meaning?
    > I'm a native English speaker, but can only see one meaning
    > 'I was unknown to you, yet you let me stay in your house'
    > Although 'took me in' could also mean 'accept as a friend'
    >
    >
    > Colin S. Miller
    >

    Also 'I was unknown to you and you deceived me'. Slightly colloquial


    _____________________________________________________________________
    This message has been checked for all known viruses by the MessageLabs Virus Scanning Service.
    Harvey Thomas, Jul 15, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Harvey Thomas

    Roy Smith Guest

    Harvey Thomas <> wrote:
    > Also 'I was unknown to you and you deceived me'. Slightly colloquial


    Given the biblical meaning of "known", this could have even more than
    two meanings :)
    Roy Smith, Jul 15, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Harvey Thomas

    Alan Kennedy Guest

    Syver Enstad wrote:

    > > Given the biblical meaning of "known", this could have even more than
    > > two meanings :)

    >
    > Does "to know" in english also mean to feel someone? In my own language
    > the direct translation of the english know also means to feel. I could
    > say (translated) "I know the cold", meaning I feel the cold
    > weather.


    To "know" someone, in the biblical sense, is to have "carnal
    knowledge" of them, i.e. "knowledge of the flesh", i.e. to have had
    sexual relations with them.

    Some of the English translations of the bible use terms such as "And
    Adam knew Eve, and Eve begat 2 children", etc, etc. These translations
    are probably from the middle ages, or earlier.

    --
    alan kennedy
    -----------------------------------------------------
    check http headers here: http://xhaus.com/headers
    email alan: http://xhaus.com/mailto/alan
    Alan Kennedy, Jul 15, 2003
    #3
  4. Harvey Thomas

    Syver Enstad Guest

    Alan Kennedy <> writes:

    > Syver Enstad wrote:
    >
    > > > Given the biblical meaning of "known", this could have even more

    > than
    >
    > > > two meanings :)

    > >
    > > Does "to know" in english also mean to feel someone? In my own

    > language
    >
    > > the direct translation of the english know also means to feel. I

    > could
    >
    > > say (translated) "I know the cold", meaning I feel the cold
    > > weather.

    >
    > To "know" someone, in the biblical sense, is to have "carnal
    > knowledge" of them, i.e. "knowledge of the flesh", i.e. to have had
    > sexual relations with them.


    Yes, I know that, I think it sounds great. It's just didn't make sense
    the way I understand the english word "to know".

    --

    Vennlig hilsen

    Syver Enstad
    Syver Enstad, Jul 15, 2003
    #4
  5. Harvey Thomas

    John J. Lee Guest

    Syver Enstad <> writes:
    [...]
    > Does "to know" in english also mean to feel someone? In my own language
    > the direct translation of the english know also means to feel. I could
    > say (translated) "I know the cold", meaning I feel the cold
    > weather.


    There's a similar meaning in English. Isn't used often, probably
    because it implies some kind of seriousness, usually as "to know <some
    emotion>". "I know the cold" works, but it'd sound like you were
    about to tell us that you did 30 years hard labour in Siberia (OK, not
    necessarily *quite* that extreme ;-). Or maybe it sounds serious
    because it isn't used often <0.5 wink>.

    Not usually used about people, though, because "to know <some person>"
    in a context which implies anything other than the everyday meaning is
    associated with "the biblical sense" (which is almost an idiomatic
    phrase in itself!).

    How the hell did nature sneak all this subtlety of English usage into
    my brain without me noticing it?

    making-a-link-with-Python-would-be-easy-but-pointless-ly y'rs,


    John
    John J. Lee, Jul 15, 2003
    #5
  6. Alan Kennedy <> wrote in message news:<>...
    > Syver Enstad wrote:
    >
    > > > Given the biblical meaning of "known", this could have even more than
    > > > two meanings :)

    > >
    > > Does "to know" in english also mean to feel someone? In my own language
    > > the direct translation of the english know also means to feel. I could
    > > say (translated) "I know the cold", meaning I feel the cold
    > > weather.

    >
    > To "know" someone, in the biblical sense, is to have "carnal
    > knowledge" of them, i.e. "knowledge of the flesh", i.e. to have had
    > sexual relations with them.
    >
    > Some of the English translations of the bible use terms such as "And
    > Adam knew Eve, and Eve begat 2 children", etc, etc. These translations
    > are probably from the middle ages, or earlier.



    It comes at least from the Latin version and I would not be surprised
    if the double sense of "known" was in the Greek version too (any Greek
    here?).

    Now, Latin had to verbs for "to know": "scire" and "cognoscere".
    Only the second one had the sexual double meaning. The double meaning
    has been preserved in modern latin languages:

    Italian -> conoscere
    French -> connaitre
    Spanish -> conocer

    The other verb "scire" has generated (if I am not mistaken) "sapere",
    savoir", "saber" and of course "science", which are sexually clean,
    at least as
    far as I know ;)


    P.S. according to http://www.freedict.com/cgi-bin/onldict.cgi

    scio -> to know, understand.
    cognosco -> to examine, inquire, learn
    Michele Simionato, Jul 17, 2003
    #6
  7. Harvey Thomas

    JanC Guest

    (Michele Simionato) schreef:

    > It comes at least from the Latin version and I would not be surprised
    > if the double sense of "known" was in the Greek version too (any Greek
    > here?).


    I'm not Greek, but I still have a ancient Greek dictionary from school. :)

    The verb "gignooskoo" (trying to write it with Latin letters ;) does indeed
    have the same "double" meaning in ancient Greek. (Of course this is not
    really a "double" meaning, if you think about it.)

    In Dutch the normal translation of "to know" is "kennen" or "weten", the
    sexual meaning is translated as "bekennen" (but, just like in English, it
    is not really common in contemporary Dutch). Interesting is that
    "bekennen" also has another meaning in Dutch: "to profess", "to confess"...

    > Now, Latin had to verbs for "to know": "scire" and "cognoscere".


    And "cognovisse". (I still have a latin dictionary too... :)

    --
    JanC

    "Be strict when sending and tolerant when receiving."
    RFC 1958 - Architectural Principles of the Internet - section 3.9
    JanC, Jul 17, 2003
    #7
  8. Harvey Thomas

    Alan Kennedy Guest

    A challenge to the ASCII proponents.

    JanC wrote:

    > The verb "gignooskoo" (trying to write it with Latin letters ;)


    Why limit yourself to that nasty little us-ascii alphabet? >;-)

    Here it is in a format where almost everybody will be able to see the
    original greek verb on their screen.

    #---------
    <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
    <verb>γίγνωσκω</verb>
    #---------

    For anybody who has MS Internet Explorer 5+, Netscape 6+, Mozilla 1+,
    i.e. any browser that supports XML, simply save this to a disk file
    and open it in your chosen browser.

    Of course, I could also have used charset "iso-8859-7", in which case
    the character codes would be one-byte-only. But I don't think that
    would have travelled well over UseNet to most of you.

    Or I could have used UTF-16, in which case every character would have
    been two-bytes. But the same UseNet problems apply.

    So, the challenge to the ASCII proponents is: put the greek word
    "gignooskoo" on everybody's screen, originating from a usenet message,
    in the original greek, where "oo" -> greek letter omega.

    Obviously, it could also be represented in python itself. But I think
    it is fair to exclude python, given that not everyone reading this
    message will have python available to them (think of people stumbling
    across this posting while searching the archives for information about
    the origin of the word "science" for example).

    I expect you won't find it as simple as the XML above, although I'm
    also completely prepared to be proven wrong (Alan tries to cover his
    a** in advance ;-).

    --
    alan kennedy
    -----------------------------------------------------
    check http headers here: http://xhaus.com/headers
    email alan: http://xhaus.com/mailto/alan
    Alan Kennedy, Jul 17, 2003
    #8
  9. JanC <> wrote in message news:<Xns93BB246FDDBCFJanC@213.118.75.80>...
    > (Michele Simionato) schreef:
    >
    > > Now, Latin had to verbs for "to know": "scire" and "cognoscere".

    >
    > And "cognovisse". (I still have a latin dictionary too... :)



    Huh? "cognovisse" cannot be a verb, what would be the paradigma?


    Michele
    Michele Simionato, Jul 17, 2003
    #9
  10. Harvey Thomas

    Alan Kennedy Guest

    Re: A challenge to the ASCII proponents.

    JanC:

    >>> The verb "gignooskoo" (trying to write it with Latin letters ;)


    Alan Kennedy wrote:

    >> Why limit yourself to that nasty little us-ascii alphabet? >;-)


    Ben Finney wrote:

    > Because it will display reliably on any computer.


    I'm not so sure. Depends on what you mean by display I suppose. I have
    a luddite classics professor friend who would deride the assertion
    that the above is an accurate representation of the original greek
    word.

    > > Here it is in a format where almost everybody will be able to see the
    > > original greek verb on their screen.
    > > [instructions to cut and paste to a file, then open in a limited range
    > > of programs, on computers possessing the appropriate font]
    > >
    > > So, the challenge to the ASCII proponents is: put the greek word
    > > "gignooskoo" on everybody's screen, originating from a usenet message,
    > > in the original greek, where "oo" -> greek letter omega.

    >
    > Challenge accepted:
    >
    > Open any drawing program. Draw, in order from left to right, the Greek
    > characters gamma, ipsilon, gamma, nu, omega, sigma, kappa, omega.
    >
    > Done. The desired word now appears on the screen.


    OK, now that we've solved that problem, let's move it up a level.

    Now we want our greek to be indexable and searchable, so that, for
    example, I can go to google and have it returned as a hit for the word
    "gignooskoo". (apologies to greek people and greek scholars for the
    poor rendering, if you've found this message at all).

    And we want our greek to be accessible to visually disabled people.
    Hacks like displaying bitmaps instead of glyphs work for visual
    rendering. But what about non-visual renderings? Aural renderings?
    Braille renderings?

    > Oh, what's that -- you say that's cheating because the user has to use
    > particular programs? Perform manual steps? Have some existing
    > knowledge about the process? That the process may fail for any of these
    > reasons?


    Not necessarily cheating. Just not scalable (to say, "The Illiad").
    And not searchable. Or accessible. Yes, I could automate the process,
    by say generating a series of vector commands, which results in
    drawing the glyph on the users screen. But it still isn't searchable.

    As for particular programs: we all use a limited set of software that
    fits our personal paradigm for information modelling. But my process
    only involved OS and software-independent concepts, listed below under
    "existing knowledge". Also, I think browsers are pretty universal
    these days. Note also that your proposed process requires the
    availability of drawing software.

    Perform manual steps: There'll always be manual steps. I count 12
    mouse presses to follow my process. How many for yours?

    Existing knowledge: All I need was knowledge of copy&paste, file
    creation and file viewing. I might need Pretty basic and universal
    computer knowledge, in these days of GUIs.

    > Those are attributes of the "simple" process of manually manipulating
    > XML content you gave.


    Fair enough, if copying and pasting is a complex and error-prone
    operation. But it's not. And even the copying and pasting would be
    eliminated if I could have the usenet transport protocol encode its
    data and metadata in XML.

    And yes, it would also be necessary if I could encode protocol
    metadata in UTF-8. But I can't. HTTP and MIME, restrict me to 8-bit
    character sets like iso-8859-1.

    > Not every computer is capable of automatically displaying Greek
    > characters. Even for those which can, there's not yet a universal way
    > to instruct them to do so. Hence, it is not possible to have any
    > computer automatically display a word with Greek characters.


    > But you already knew that, so why the silly challenge?


    To raise the stakes once somebody has "ante'd up" >;-)

    --
    alan kennedy
    -----------------------------------------------------
    check http headers here: http://xhaus.com/headers
    email alan: http://xhaus.com/mailto/alan
    Alan Kennedy, Jul 17, 2003
    #10
  11. Re: A challenge to the ASCII proponents.

    Alan Kennedy wrote:
    > For anybody who has MS Internet Explorer 5+, Netscape 6+, Mozilla 1+,
    > i.e. any browser that supports XML, simply save this to a disk file
    > and open it in your chosen browser.

    [...]

    > So, the challenge to the ASCII proponents is: put the greek word
    > "gignooskoo" on everybody's screen, originating from a usenet message,
    > in the original greek, where "oo" -> greek letter omega.

    [...]
    > I expect you won't find it as simple as the XML above, although I'm
    > also completely prepared to be proven wrong (Alan tries to cover his
    > a** in advance ;-).


    So what do you think about this message?:

    γίγνωσκω

    Look Ma, no markup. And not every character uses two bytes, either.
    And I can use Umlauts (äöü) and Arabic (ءﺎﻣ.ﺔﻛﺮﺷ) if I want to.

    I don't know for whom this renders well, but I guess MSIE5+, NS6+
    and Mozilla 1+ are good candidates - without the need for saving
    things into files.

    Regards,
    Martin
    Martin v. Loewis, Jul 17, 2003
    #11
  12. Re: A challenge to the ASCII proponents.

    Martin v. Loewis wrote:

    > γίγνωσκω
    >
    > Look Ma, no markup. And not every character uses two bytes, either.
    > And I can use Umlauts (äöü) and Arabic (ءﺎﻣ.ﺔﻛﺮﺷ) if I want to.
    >
    > I don't know for whom this renders well, but I guess MSIE5+, NS6+
    > and Mozilla 1+ are good candidates - without the need for saving
    > things into files.


    Exactly, it renders perfectly okay for me (mozilla 1.4).
    I wonder one thing: how did you type it in?

    --Irmen
    Irmen de Jong, Jul 17, 2003
    #12
  13. Re: A challenge to the ASCII proponents.

    On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 00:33:38 +0200, Martin v. Loewis <>
    wrote:

    > So what do you think about this message?:
    >
    > γίγνωσκω
    >
    > Look Ma, no markup. And not every character uses two bytes, either.
    > And I can use Umlauts (äöü) and Arabic (ءﺎﻣ.ﺔﻛﺮﺷ) if I want to.
    >
    > I don't know for whom this renders well, but I guess MSIE5+, NS6+
    > and Mozilla 1+ are good candidates - without the need for saving
    > things into files.


    And Opera (7.11). I would also like to know what's the trick.

    Florian
    Florian Schulze, Jul 17, 2003
    #13
  14. Re: A challenge to the ASCII proponents.

    Irmen de Jong wrote:

    > Exactly, it renders perfectly okay for me (mozilla 1.4).
    > I wonder one thing: how did you type it in?


    The Greek one, I copied from the XML file that Alan sent:
    I did as he said. Save file to disk, open it in the browser.
    I then copied the characters from one browser window to another.

    For the umlauts, I just pressed the relevant characters on
    my German keyboard.

    For the Arabic, I copied some string from a web page
    (the demo page of worldnames.net). Notice that this is
    right-to-left, so don't be surprised if your cursor is
    on the left end of the text at the end of pasting. Just
    pressing the closing parenthesis will switch back to
    left-to-right mode.

    Regards,
    Martin
    Martin v. Loewis, Jul 18, 2003
    #14
  15. Harvey Thomas

    Aahz Guest

    Re: A challenge to the ASCII proponents.

    In article <>,
    Martin v. Loewis <> wrote:
    >
    >So what do you think about this message?:
    >
    >γίγνωσκω


    Well, that renders as

    ........<1/2 symbol>.....o..

    in trn3.6 running in a vt100 emulator window, and it renders as

    ........<1/2 symbol>.~I.~C.o.~I

    when I started up vi to follow up (again in the vt100 emulator).
    --
    Aahz () <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/

    A: No.
    Q: Is top-posting okay?
    Aahz, Jul 18, 2003
    #15
  16. Harvey Thomas

    Ben Finney Guest

    Re: A challenge to the ASCII proponents.

    On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 11:53:05 +0100, Alan Kennedy wrote:
    > JanC wrote:
    >> The verb "gignooskoo" (trying to write it with Latin letters ;)

    > Why limit yourself to that nasty little us-ascii alphabet? >;-)


    Because it will display reliably on any computer.

    > Here it is in a format where almost everybody will be able to see the
    > original greek verb on their screen.
    > [instructions to cut and paste to a file, then open in a limited range
    > of programs, on computers possessing the appropriate font]
    >
    > So, the challenge to the ASCII proponents is: put the greek word
    > "gignooskoo" on everybody's screen, originating from a usenet message,
    > in the original greek, where "oo" -> greek letter omega.


    Challenge accepted:

    Open any drawing program. Draw, in order from left to right, the Greek
    characters gamma, ipsilon, gamma, nu, omega, sigma, kappa, omega.

    Done. The desired word now appears on the screen.

    Oh, what's that -- you say that's cheating because the user has to use
    particular programs? Perform manual steps? Have some existing
    knowledge about the process? That the process may fail for any of these
    reasons?

    Those are attributes of the "simple" process of manually manipulating
    XML content you gave.

    Not every computer is capable of automatically displaying Greek
    characters. Even for those which can, there's not yet a universal way
    to instruct them to do so. Hence, it is not possible to have any
    computer automatically display a word with Greek characters.

    But you already knew that, so why the silly challenge?

    --
    \ "Behind every successful man is a woman, behind her is his |
    `\ wife." -- Groucho Marx |
    _o__) |
    http://bignose.squidly.org/ 9CFE12B0 791A4267 887F520C B7AC2E51 BD41714B
    Ben Finney, Jul 18, 2003
    #16
  17. Harvey Thomas

    Paul Foley Guest

    Re: A challenge to the ASCII proponents.

    On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 00:33:38 +0200, Martin v Loewis wrote:

    > Alan Kennedy wrote:
    >> For anybody who has MS Internet Explorer 5+, Netscape 6+, Mozilla 1+,
    >> i.e. any browser that supports XML, simply save this to a disk file
    >> and open it in your chosen browser.

    > [...]


    >> So, the challenge to the ASCII proponents is: put the greek word
    >> "gignooskoo" on everybody's screen, originating from a usenet message,
    >> in the original greek, where "oo" -> greek letter omega.

    > [...]
    >> I expect you won't find it as simple as the XML above, although I'm
    >> also completely prepared to be proven wrong (Alan tries to cover his
    >> a** in advance ;-).


    > So what do you think about this message?:


    > γίγνωσκω


    Works fine, except that it should be γιγνώσκω (I really want U+1F7D
    rather than U+03CE for the accented letter, but I can't type that, and
    you probably don't have a font with that glyph anyway); but it looks
    quite ugly in the font Emacs chooses to display it in.

    FWIW, "gignw/skw" is the best way to write it in ASCII (Google even
    seems to know betacode, so you can search for "gignw/skw" and find
    Greek texts)

    > I don't know for whom this renders well, but I guess MSIE5+, NS6+
    > and Mozilla 1+ are good candidates - without the need for saving
    > things into files.


    Add Gnus.

    --
    Just because we Lisp programmers are better than everyone else is no
    excuse for us to be arrogant. -- Erann Gat

    (setq reply-to
    (concatenate 'string "Paul Foley " "<mycroft" '(#\@) "actrix.gen.nz>"))
    Paul Foley, Jul 18, 2003
    #17
  18. Re: A challenge to the ASCII proponents.

    On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 11:53:05 +0100, Alan Kennedy <> wrote:

    >JanC wrote:
    >
    >> The verb "gignooskoo" (trying to write it with Latin letters ;)

    >
    >Why limit yourself to that nasty little us-ascii alphabet? >;-)
    >
    >Here it is in a format where almost everybody will be able to see the
    >original greek verb on their screen.
    >
    >#---------
    ><?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
    ><verb>γίγνωσκω</verb>
    >#---------
    >
    >For anybody who has MS Internet Explorer 5+, Netscape 6+, Mozilla 1+,
    >i.e. any browser that supports XML, simply save this to a disk file
    >and open it in your chosen browser.
    >

    Sorry, that doesn't work for my old browser (NS4.5 ;-) Try this:

    ====< giginooskoo.html >======================================================
    <html><head>
    <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; CHARSET=iso-8859-7">
    <style> H1 {font-size: 72pt} </style>
    <title>gignooskoo</title></head><body>
    <h1>γίγνωσκω</h1>
    </body></html>
    ==============================================================================

    >Of course, I could also have used charset "iso-8859-7", in which case
    >the character codes would be one-byte-only. But I don't think that
    >would have travelled well over UseNet to most of you.
    >

    The above seems to work for me. Does it you? Windows-1253 as char set should also work, I think.
    (I made the char numeric entities decimal, as some old browsers don't do &#x...;)
    (There's also some unnecessary formatting ;-)

    Regards,
    Bengt Richter
    Bengt Richter, Jul 18, 2003
    #18
  19. Re: A challenge to the ASCII proponents.

    "Martin v. Loewis" wrote:

    > So what do you think about this message?:
    >
    > [non ASCII characters]
    >
    > Look Ma, no markup.


    Yeah, but that only works if everyone's expecting the same encoding. I
    just see garbage non-ASCII characters, for instance, with my lowly
    Netscape 4 newsreader.

    > And not every character uses two bytes, either.


    Looked like it was probably was here, I saw what looked very strongly
    like eight double-byte characters (and two bytes each).

    --
    Erik Max Francis && && http://www.alcyone.com/max/
    __ San Jose, CA, USA && 37 20 N 121 53 W && &tSftDotIotE
    / \ Wretches hang that jurymen may dine.
    \__/ Alexander Pope
    Erik Max Francis, Jul 18, 2003
    #19
  20. Re: A challenge to the ASCII proponents.

    Ben Finney wrote:

    > I think it looks like a series of identical question marks.
    > Presumably
    > you wrote it using a character set my terminal isn't using, and you
    > had
    > no way of instructing my computer to use.


    When you see the right number of question marks, that usually means
    whatever's processing it knows it's dealing with Unicode, but can't
    display the glyphs. So your terminal knows the character set, it just
    doesn't have the glyphs in the font it's using.

    --
    Erik Max Francis && && http://www.alcyone.com/max/
    __ San Jose, CA, USA && 37 20 N 121 53 W && &tSftDotIotE
    / \ Wretches hang that jurymen may dine.
    \__/ Alexander Pope
    Erik Max Francis, Jul 18, 2003
    #20
    1. Advertising

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

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Matt
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    431
    John Harrison
    Sep 12, 2004
  2. mangesh

    Meanings of macro

    mangesh, Oct 3, 2006, in forum: C++
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    287
    Frederick Gotham
    Oct 3, 2006
  3. Felix Kater

    two meanings of a cast

    Felix Kater, Apr 27, 2007, in forum: C Programming
    Replies:
    18
    Views:
    574
    Army1987
    May 25, 2007
  4. Tim Couper
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    423
    Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch
    Sep 11, 2007
  5. Jeff McNeil
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    407
    Jeff McNeil
    Sep 11, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page