[OT] Indian C programmers and "u"

[Slartibartfast]

No. In an intellectual environment (such as comp.lang.c), there's no
place for slangy shorthand, at least not if you want to sound
intelligent and be taken seriously (IMHO).

IMHO??? Methinks somebody has just discovered either irony or hypocrisy.

HAND.

 

[Thomas Stegen]

Richard Heathfield wrote:

[snip]

and it is perfectly sensible to ask him to drop the
133tn3s5 and write intelligibly.

^^^^^^^^

huh?

(But I do get your point nevertheless

 

[Thomas Stegen]

Floyd Davidson wrote:
[snip]

"doubt v.t. 1) to be uncertain about; question; feel
distrust of. ..."

That is fair enough. It is the use of "I have a doubt" to
mean "I have a question" which is wrong though. And
"to question" and "a question" are different things.

 

[Thomas Stegen]

J. J. Farrell wrote:
...



Huh? How did this thread start?

JP> Why is it that *every single* Indian C programmer
JP> I have seen on this newsgroup writes "u" for "you"?

JP> Do they have a law in India forcing schools to
JP> teach mangled English or something?

Does this count as scepticism?

It counts as idiocy. Wholly unappropriate and not needed.
Since you asked...

 

[Thomas Stegen]

I've been wondering about this for too long. Why is it that *every
single* Indian C programmer I have seen on this newsgroup writes "u"
for "you"? Many manage otherwise perfectly grammatical English but
that one mistake sticks out. Do they have a law in India forcing
schools to teach mangled English or something?

A bit late, But please do not feed the trolls.

I made a promise to myself never again to make posts such as this one.
But when this comes from a regular...

 

[Nils Petter Vaskinn]

huh?

leetness

d00d5 (dudes) like to think they are very 1337 (elite) you see, and one
sign of 13£tn355 (leetness) is to replace every possible character with
one that looks a little like the one you mean (as you can see it doen't
exactly make things easy to read). When we ridicule them (dood5) we like
to use their style of writing.

 

[Floyd Davidson]

Floyd Davidson wrote:
[snip]

"doubt v.t. 1) to be uncertain about; question; feel
distrust of. ..."

That is fair enough. It is the use of "I have a doubt" to
mean "I have a question" which is wrong though. And
"to question" and "a question" are different things.

Where I grew up the phrase "I have my doubts about ..." was
pretty common.

I have no doubt there are people who doubt that it is proper
English... but have my doubts about their vocabulary.

 

[R. Rajesh Jeba Anbiah]

I've been wondering about this for too long. Why is it that *every
single* Indian C programmer I have seen on this newsgroup writes "u"
for "you"?

"every single" is overstatement; may be you meant "most".

Many manage otherwise perfectly grammatical English but
that one mistake sticks out.

When I was learning English (that was before I've seen Computers and
SMS), I'd thought why people unnecessarily use "yo" in "you" when they
just pronounce it as "u". In my native language (Tamil), we write what
we speak/pronounce; we pronounce what we write. It is to say in Tamil,
we don't have any silent words (as in psychology or as in you).

Here are my reasons:

1. Browsing is too costly in India; many people don't know typing.
And so, they prefer to use "u" instead of long "you".
2. People think, "u" is stylish to use in web.
3. People don't know the difference between NG and chat room.
4. There is no such netiquettes. People may think, if ciao
(Italian) is acceptable in NG, then "u" must also be acceptable.
5. Few people may think why such hypocrisy---they accept dude speak
in chat rooms and IRC, but why not in NG.

Do they have a law in India forcing
schools to teach mangled English or something?

LOL! <kidding>BTW, Is there any law in Finland to force Joona to
post irrational statements?</kidding>

 

[R. Rajesh Jeba Anbiah]

As for myself, I'd be very pleased to see all 'national' borders
completely disappear. Just five or six billion *individuals*
all respecting one another's individual rights, associating when
they desire, or not, when they don't.

I strongly vouch your statement. My knowledge about America is quite
limited to CNN and few chat guys. Those chat guys have the opinions
about mine (and you) regarding the nationalism, but it is not what
projected to the outside world about Americans especially through
media like CNN. This is also same for India---'coz most of the
politicians and media projects Pakistan as the enemy.

 

[Christopher Benson-Manica]

IMHO??? Methinks somebody has just discovered either irony or hypocrisy.

Both, probably Neither was lost on me as I made the previous
post...

 

[John L]

leetness

d00d5 (dudes) like to think they are very 1337 (elite) you see, and one
sign of 13£tn355 (leetness) is to replace every possible character with
one that looks a little like the one you mean (as you can see it doen't
exactly make things easy to read). When we ridicule them (dood5) we like
to use their style of writing.

This is not what is happening in India (and some other Asian countries);
rather, it is a form of speed typing which motivates these abbreviations.
But because the one form looks much like the other, it is also condemned.
Other motivations for similar abominations have given Americans "thru" and
our children "Toys R Us".

It is not a sign Indian programmers are stupid, and there ought to
be more sensitive ways of objecting to the style, just as some can
redirect posters to, say, without questioning
their sanity.

John.

 

[Chris Dollin]

Floyd Davidson wrote:
[snip]

"doubt v.t. 1) to be uncertain about; question; feel
distrust of. ..."

That is fair enough. It is the use of "I have a doubt" to
mean "I have a question" which is wrong though. And
"to question" and "a question" are different things.

Where I grew up the phrase "I have my doubts about ..." was
pretty common.

I have my doubts about whether all this is on topic. In fact,
I doubt that it is (on topic). However, I don't have *a doubt*
about it.

I have no doubt there are people who doubt that it is proper
English... but have my doubts about their vocabulary.

But do you have *questions* about their vocabulary - and are the
doubts and the questions the same thing?

 

[Irrwahn Grausewitz]

Floyd Davidson wrote:
[snip]

"doubt v.t. 1) to be uncertain about; question; feel
distrust of. ..."

That is fair enough. It is the use of "I have a doubt" to
mean "I have a question" which is wrong though. And
"to question" and "a question" are different things.

Where I grew up the phrase "I have my doubts about ..." was
pretty common.

I have no doubt there are people who doubt that it is proper
English... but have my doubts about their vocabulary.

But "having a doubt about" isn't synonymous to "having a question
about", is it? It's more like "feeling uncertain about", like in
[literally quoted from a dictionary]:

When in doubt about the meaning of a word, consult a dictionary.

or "question the truth of", like in:

I have a doubt about the standard conformance of 'void main(...)'.

However, I doubt that this thread is on-topic. No doubt that
some/most people will agree with me on that. Doubtlessly that's
the reason for the "[OT]" attribute in the subject line.

And what was my C doubt? =:-0

Regards

 

[Dan Pop]

I doubt the extent of your English vocabulary.

It's fairly narrow, but this is not the point.

A quick check in any dictionary should show that "doubt", used
as a transitive verb, means "question", and indeed "question"
will be listed as a synonym and/or as either part of the
definition or in the usage of the word.

Apparently this is less common today than it was historically,
because of the dictionaries that I did look at, newer ones use
it vaguely,

"... to consider questionable ..."

while older dictionaries are more explicit,

"doubt v.t. 1) to be uncertain about; question; feel
distrust of. ..."

This last from a 1968 edition.

An entirely moot point, since we're talking about "question" as a NOUN,
not as a verb. I'm sure you can tell the difference, if you engage your
brain...

Joona was refering to people writing "I have a doubt about <whatever
C feature>", when they clearly mean "I have a question about...".

Dan

 

[Dan Pop]

<snipped most of previous post>
<OT>
Also please have the decency to mention off-topic when it is so. And

The whole thread is labeled as off-topic, in the subject line, so why the
hell would anyone expect topical contents inside?

PS. At least the OP mentioned OT in his header(headers are not

And the [OT] tag is present in the subject line of *all* the posts in
the thread. So, what's your point, if any?

visible in all mail clients ,still...).

If you don't see the subject line, how do you decide what to read and
what to ignore?

Others seem to have lost all track of their self-made conventions.

We're not talking here about any self-made conventions.

Dan

 

[Dan Pop]

IMHO??? Methinks somebody has just discovered either irony or hypocrisy.

HAND.

Nope. Informal text based communication using electronic means has
developed its own set of abbreviations, well and widely documented.
Any good Internet tutorial also contains a list with the most common ones.

They've been created to be used, and not only to be inventoried in a
zillion places on the Web...

OTOH, ad hoc invented abbreviations, and Joona is one of the major
offenders in this newsgroup, are even sillier than "u" and its kin.

Dan

 

[Kevin Bracey]

According to one of the most popular Web dictionaries, the former:

Main Entry: learnt
Pronunciation: 'l&rnt
chiefly British past and past participle of LEARN

FWIW, I'm British, and I'd say "I learnt", and "I have learned". I think
"learnt" as the past tense is certainly the dominant form here.

Likewise dreamt, spelt and others.

 

[Anupam]

You are over-reacting.

Is that so? Well how should a person react when he gets insulted on
his nationality? I would love to hear your invaluable suggestions.

It shouldn't have done.


Only of inane abbreviations like "u" for "you".

That was not too obvious if you would care to look at the entire
series of postings. Nationality and race have been brought to the
centre of attention if you did not notice.

Then try opening your eyes.


Then don't. All you are contributing is incomprehension.

Firstly I'd like to say that I know that you are a well-respected
member of the clc community so if you mean to say "don't" in the group
as a whole, then I'd willingly oblige. I like C, but I know it's of no
use if I have to be a member of the group while facing your animosity.
On the other hand if you meant it as pertaining only to this thread
the para below caters to that.
You are taking this out of context. All I said was that I did not
want to contribute to the "rant"s here. I can only say that you are
sadly mistaken when you say this is a rant. I never said that I would
not correct incorrect facts.
I think I have a right to say what I feel here as much as the next
person. Now, please do not say that this is off topic ... that would
describe this entire thread very well.

<rant snipped>

Interesting that you should call this a rant.

A rant is defined in the Webster's as "pompous or pretentious talk or
writing".
What I had said was not for attracting attention in a cheap manner.
Try looking at it without blinders . Maybe you will find that the
message is relevant to many aspects of today's life.

At the end of it all, I would like to say that I reacted strongly
only because it pertained to a racial aspect. Had you caught me up on
an aspect of C I would have gladly accepted my mistake and gone on.

 

[Anupam]

Piss off then. You're going to have to grow a thicker skin if you are
going to last here on Usenet.

As a gentleman, Im not going to answer that one in the terms you
expect. You won't get the four letter words from me. All I can say is
that if enough of the seniors say so, fine... I will. It is more your
world... I acknowledge that I'm not old enough to this group and order
is very important.
And yes I will not grow a thick enough skin to ever allow my country
to be insulted. That should not be a problem in the Usenet I feel.

There's quite a difference between wars, people dying, etc, and an
offtopic Usenet thread. Get some perspective.

Ok maybe I got a bit carried away... but these are the roots from
where it starts.

Except for Dan Pop, everybody occasionally posts the wrong thing to the
wrong group. Since Joona has been a regular poster here for several
years, most of the regulars will give him a mulligan this time, and save
the flames for the next occasion.

I do not think Joona had too much of hatred in mind when the original
post was done.I would feel it was more a sudden rush of blood. I was
mostly referring to the follow ups.

Certainly nobody is begging you to stay, particularly if you persist in
being overly sensitive about something that should not upset any normal
adult person.

"Piss off" and "not begging to stay". Do you not see an inherent
contradiction here?

 

[Anuradha]

Hey,

I would love to really thank you for enriching us [Indians] on how not
to use monosyllables. I hope you also understand that this place is
not the right place for the flames to be posted.

We [Indians] opt English as second language. Not like westerners whose
mother tongue is English and still people are [ sizeable number ] who
does not have even communication skills. There is enough room for
North Europeans too.

Well, as far as I have learnt it is character that maketh [wo]man not
the language. Just ponder.... hope you are rational enough.

Hail !!! westerners for inventing monosyllables and also inducting it
in the dictionary. so, are they illiterates ???????

Well, I would really like not to raise the roof here at least where I
respect the group. Should you still insist we would create a group and
start the flame... Having said, I have enough points to pick you up.

It would be good enough if you apologize in this group [ which i hope
you would not ] and that would show whether the person is literate or
not....

Got my point......

Happy Thanks Giving......

Anu