[OT] Indian C programmers and "u"

Discussion in 'C Programming' started by Joona I Palaste, Nov 25, 2003.

  1. Joona I Palaste

    Anuradha Guest

    Thanks, for highlighting !!!! Kindly re-read the sentence ;-) i
    mentioned even westerners whose mother tongue is English are unable to
    communicate in English precisely.

    Also there is room for improvement even for North Europeans.....

    It would be better to teach others rather than be preachy enough and
    blow ones own trumpet....

    Sweet flames ahead....

    Anu
     
    Anuradha, Nov 26, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  2. Joona I Palaste

    Anuradha Guest


    Excused....

    So good of you to think rational enough at least while posting here
    to say that you never thought of using "dw33bsp33k".

    Never did I say "excuse us" rather hit the cord by saying, there is
    room for improvement for everyone in this world. Please do not try to
    be sarcastic on others unless you are good in almost all the areas in
    this life.

    Smileys ahead....
     
    Anuradha, Nov 26, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  3. It is not subtle. The two are not interchangeable.

    People who have english as their second language often have
    a better grasp of grammar and semantics of words than native
    speakers (if they have been learning the language for some
    time). The reason is that native speakers generally know
    very little outside colloquial meanings of words unless these
    words happens to have formal meanings in some area the person
    has some expertise in.
     
    Thomas Stegen, Nov 26, 2003
  4. Someone started an idiotic usenet thread. If you feel angry at what
    someone says hit back, do not play the victim. No one is ganging up
    against Indians here.
     
    Debashish Chakravarty, Nov 26, 2003
  5. If someone who I otherwise know to be a sensible chap insults my
    nationality, I presume he's either joking or foolish. In this case, I think
    Joona was guilty of a little of both.

    Foolishly, by oversensitive souls who can't see the real issue at stake
    here, which is one of communication.
    I'm flattered.
    What animosity? I'm trying to cool you down, not heat you up. You've
    over-reacted, so try under-reacting instead.
    The context is simple; some people rather discourteously use "u" instead of
    "you", putting a trivial saving (just two characters) at a higher premium
    than other people's ease of reading. Joona's observation was accurate in
    that respect, at least.

    If we all write for ease of reading rather than ease of writing, everyone
    will get on a lot better.

    <snip>
     
    Richard Heathfield, Nov 26, 2003
  6. Joona I Palaste

    pandapower Guest

    We [Indians] opt English as second language. Not like westerners whose
    The term that "Every Single INDIAN Programmer" uses "u" in place of
    "you" is a gross misappropriation of facts and thats the reason for
    this flame.So what do you expect us indians to infer other than that
    it was a sarcastic remark to derogate all indians(even those who use
    correct english).And don't assume that this will in anyway deter the
    confidence of indian programmers as the driving forces of today's
    technologies.It wont be long enough when you will be seeing the logo
    "India inside" (instead of the "Intel inside"),as there will be
    indian programmers involved or parts manufactured in india in every
    single device.

    Its the westeners who have given us "u" , its not indians who have
    invented it.Indians have always given things which the world should be
    proud of.We have given you 0 which is the basis of all digital
    communications today(0's and 1's).It would be wise to correct the root
    cause of the problem than pinpointing indians.

    And this remark of the gentleman,could elicit a flame from an indian
    girl(anuradha in this case) who are admired for their patience, just
    goes on to show the deep rooted misconception of the originator of the
    post about the usage of the english language of "Every Indian
    Programmer".He surely deserves to give a apology unless he is
    undeducated and illiterate :) .

    Its always good to admit your wrongs than blaming someone else when
    the problem lies somewhere else.

    And i request people to take it as a healthy,informal and
    light-hearted discussion rather than feeling saddened and accused
    which may reflect in normal posts of this group, because most of the
    people here are regular posters.



    To light it up a bit, the three reasons India is now at the forefront
    of technlogical advances(mostly the software industry) :

    1.Aryabhatta invented 0, the basis of all digital communications is
    0's and 1's.

    2.Columbus discovered America.A sizeable part of the foreign exchange
    indian earns comes from America.

    3.And the British while leaving india,left English behind.


    regards
     
    pandapower, Nov 26, 2003
  7. Joona I Palaste

    Mark Haigh Guest

    I did not and do not expect to recieve any four letter words from you.
    Order is not all that important. Competence, precision, and
    intelligence are valued more highly.
    Get over it. By responding in this manner you have given people
    ammunition. Your oversensitivity reflects negatively on you.
    Certainly not. It was more of a harmless troll than anything. It
    should have set off your internal troll detector.


    Mark F. Haigh
     
    Mark Haigh, Nov 26, 2003
  8. Joona I Palaste

    Mark Haigh Guest

    It's always September somewhere on the 'net... Does YHBT mean anything
    to you?

    Please refrain from posting your idiotic nationalistic banter to this
    newsgroup.

    As Forrest Gump put it, "stupid is as stupid does". Your post is a case
    study on the subject.


    Mark F. Haigh
     
    Mark Haigh, Nov 26, 2003
  9. On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:21:05 -0900, in comp.lang.c , Floyd Davidson

    (snippage)
    Dan was of course talking about the use of doubt as a synonum for
    question the noun. This is not one of its meanings:
    Doubt (n)
    1 a : uncertainty of belief or opinion that often interferes with
    decision-making b : a deliberate suspension of judgment
    2 : a state of affairs giving rise to uncertainty, hesitation, or
    suspense
    3 a : a lack of confidence : DISTRUST b : an inclination not to
    believe or accept

    None of these means question.
    in this context, "doubt" does not mean question, it means, "don't
    trust". You migth also question it, but thats not what you said. In
    English anyway.
    Not in any dictionary I care to rely on. Not even the saintly Merriam
    Webster.

    Doubt (verb)
    1 archaic a : FEAR b : SUSPECT
    2 : to be in doubt about <he doubts everyone's word>
    3 a : to lack confidence in : DISTRUST <find myself doubting him even
    when I know that he is honest -- H. L. Mencken> b : to consider
    unlikely <I doubt if I can go>

    None of these means "I question", except parenthetically (or do I mean
    euphemistically).
    And in 1968, they thought that drum memory was a neat idea.
     
    Mark McIntyre, Nov 26, 2003
  10. This is fine. It means "I am uncertain about..."
    <g>
     
    Mark McIntyre, Nov 26, 2003
  11. Well thanks for nothing! :cool:}
     
    Keith Thompson, Nov 27, 2003
  12. I partly agree, in that (in my experience) non-native speakers often
    know more about supposed rules of English grammar. This is, I think,
    largely due to the inadequacy of the British[0] education system.

    With regard to semantics, it's not so clear that non-native speakers
    have the upper hand. English is not a static, fixed thing that can be
    mastered once and for all (like C90, say). It is rather living,
    changing; its structure and semantics are determined by the community
    in which it is used. This is true in the obvious sense that new words
    and phrases are continually being added to the language while others
    fall out of use. It's true in a much deeper sense, though, because
    the meaning of individual words is determined not by a dictionary, but
    by use. A word is used for the first time in a particular context:
    the meaning shifts, the word acquires new associations[1]. If you are
    not a part of the community in which this takes place then you will
    fail to acquire these subtler, undocumented senses. At best, a
    dictionary describes a partial snapshot of the language at a given
    time, but the description of words is inevitably far cruder, although
    (indeed, because) more precisely expressed than their "actual"
    meaning.

    It's not even necessary to look further than this august forum for
    examples. What associations do the words "Rule", "confused",
    "engage", "nasal", "chapter", etc. carry? Use of these, and other,
    words in this newsgroup will evoke certain associations in regular
    readers ("native speakers", if you like) that are not apparent to
    those outside the community. Similarly, members of the
    English-speaking community share a subtle understanding, perhaps
    largely unconscious, of words and phrases in current use that is not
    available to outsiders.

    Non-native speakers are able to acquire knowledge of English as it is
    actually used only to the extent to which they participate in the
    English-speaking community - that is, only to the degree to which they
    become "native".

    A non-native speaker may bring to the language an understanding of why
    things are structured as they are. He may be able to express himself
    with greater ease, elegance and even precision. However, if he claims
    a different knowledge of the meaning of certain words than that of
    (the mass of) native speakers in general then his understanding is
    simply wrong. His semantics may coincide with those of a dictionary,
    they may be etymologically justifiable, but (if they differ from those
    generally understood by native speakers) then they are not the
    semantics of English.

    Jeremy.

    [0] The language spoken by Americans and others bears only a
    superficial resemblance to English, so they're excluded from these
    comments.

    [1] Marketing is essentially an attempt to abuse and control these
    changing meanings, to forcibly associate certain words and phrases
    with particular products in the minds of the public.
     
    Jeremy Yallop, Nov 27, 2003
  13. We have these new things called quantum verbs. They are irregular
    and regular at the same time. It has to do with parallel universes.
     
    Thomas Stegen, Nov 27, 2003
  14. I was implicitly (even implicit to me :) talking about
    non-native speakers living in an english speaking country. Probably
    because I myself do that. I often notice that I have an easier time
    understanding what a question really asks about when we are given
    an assignment here at my university. One thing I have particularly
    taken note of (both here and in "real life") is that native speakers
    very often only consider one of the meanings a word can have.
    Particularly when words have colloquial and more formal meanings.
    Examples of such words are general and weight.

    But then again I cannot see how native speakers are advantaged on
    newsgroups because of this "dynamicity". Fair enough, the language
    changes, but it changes differently in Scotland and England for
    example. Not to mention the difference from Britain to the USA.
     
    Thomas Stegen, Nov 27, 2003
  15. *ENGAGE* your brain Dan. There is no requirement that the two
    be "*perfectly*" equivalent, merely interchangeable sufficiently
    that the intent of the writer be understood by by the reader.

    And that they are.
    Clearly you should stick to C. (And since it is obvious there
    are things you cannot comprehend, it might be a good idea to stop
    insulting while you are at it.)
     
    Floyd Davidson, Nov 27, 2003
  16. Which is to say, "I have a question about..."
    I have no question that there are people who question that it
    is proper English... but I my questions about their vocabulary.
     
    Floyd Davidson, Nov 27, 2003
  17. Joona I Palaste

    pandapower Guest

    Please refrain from posting your idiotic nationalistic banter to this
    You first brother.Stop posting any nationalistic comments.
    A stupid will always call the other person stupid.

    regards
     
    pandapower, Nov 27, 2003
  18. Joona I Palaste

    Mac Guest

    I live in California, in the USA.

    I was at an Indian restaraunt the other day, and there was a hand-written
    sign on the wall which used the same substitution (i.e., 'u' for 'you.').

    The point being that I don't think it has anything to do with being a
    programmer. I think that for some reason, some Indian people have got in
    the habit of using that particular substitution in written communication.

    Like many people in this group, cute substitutions such as this annoy me
    to no end.

    None of the (large number of) Indian people I met in college did this, as
    far as I know. But based on the sign at the restaraunt, there might be
    some kind of Indian connection.

    Just my observations. I hope I don't offend anyone!

    Mac
    --
     
    Mac, Nov 27, 2003
  19. This is an excellent example of what I am talking about when I wrote:

    However, if he claims a different knowledge of the meaning of
    certain words than that of (the mass of) native speakers in general
    then his understanding is simply wrong. His semantics may coincide
    with those of a dictionary, they may be etymologically justifiable,
    but (if they differ from those generally understood by native
    speakers) then they are not the semantics of English.

    In a comp.lang.c thread a while back, you corrected a native English
    speaker with the words:

    Something is wrong "In general" when it is always wrong for all
    cases. It does not mean for all cases, or even most cases. If
    something is true for 10000 cases and false for 1 case it is not
    true in general. (<
    This is simply untrue. Any native English speaker will understand "in
    general" to mean "in most cases", although it also has other meanings,
    particularly in a more formal context. That you are apparently
    ignorant of such meanings illustrates my point. Here are the first
    few uses of "in general" that I found in the British National Corpus:

    "The population in general is very well educated about AIDS says
    Anthony Kasozi"

    "Tennis is one of my favourite sports now because tennis people, in
    general, are perfect gentlemen and ladies"

    "This was clearly a response to the devastation of war but in
    general the public commissions that have provided work for our
    artist craftsmen and women since then have tended to be bland and
    factual."

    In none of these examples does "in general" have the meaning you
    claim. It is used as a qualifier, and means approximately "most".
    The advantage is in the avoidance of errors like the above quoted
    post.

    Jeremy.
     
    Jeremy Yallop, Nov 27, 2003
  20. Joona I Palaste

    Artie Gold Guest

    That should be:

    If English *were* less perverse...

    [Of course, that's a usage that's disappearing. Where's an ISO
    standard when you need it.]

    Cheers,
    --ag
     
    Artie Gold, Nov 27, 2003
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.