End of ADS-L Digest - 24 Apr 1998 to 25 Apr 1998
<br>************************************************
<br>
<br>======================================================================
<br>
<br>From: Automatic digest processor (4/25/98)
<br>To: Recipients of ADS-L digests
<br>
<br>         ADS-L Digest - 23 Apr 1998 to 24 Apr 1998             98-04-25 00:00:06
<br>This message contains more text than QuickMail can display. The entire message
<br> has been enclosed as a file.
<br>
<br>There are 13 messages totalling 844 lines in this issue.
<br>
<br>Topics of the day:
<br>
<br>  1. other...other than
<br>  2. other Xs than Y
<br>  3. Writing prescriptions (Was Re: (In)flammable; Re: Other X's Than Y) (3)
<br>  4. LAGS dialect data
<br>  5. And now for something really . . . (2)
<br>  6. P.S. on banshees
<br>  7. wailing was:Re: P.S. on banshees
<br>  8. St Louis Blues
<br>  9. Thole story
<br> 10. Writing prescriptions
<br>
<br>----------------------------------------------------------------------
<br>
<br>Date:    Thu, 23 Apr 1998 23:25:20 -0500
<br>From:    "Donald M. Lance" <engdl[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE]SHOWME.MISSOURI.EDU>
<br>Subject: Re: other...other than
<br>
<br>>Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 23:21:44 -0500
<br>>To: Andrea Vine <Andrea.Vine[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE]Eng.Sun.COM>
<br>>From: "Donald M. Lance" <engdl[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE]showme.missouri.edu>
<br>>Subject: Re: other...other than
<br>>Cc:
<br>>Bcc:
<br>>X-Attachments:
<br>>
<br>>>I am slogging through email standards documents at the moment.  Twice in the
<br>>>same document (RFC 2046, for those of you who're interested) I have found the
<br>>>construction "other blah-blahs than foobar ..."  In both encounters, I
<br>>>had a bit
<br>>>of difficulty parsing the phrase, and so had to re-read it several times.
<br>>>Finally I inserted an additional "other" to appease my linguistic
<br>>>processor; the
<br>>>actual phrases now read:
<br>>>
<br>>>  For other subtypes of "text" other than "text/plain", the semantics of the
<br>>>charset parameter should be defined to be identical to those specified
<br>>>here for
<br>>>"text/plain", ...
<br>>>
<br>>>  Other media types other than subtypes of "text" might choose to employ the
<br>>>charset parameter as defined here, but...
<br>>>
<br>>>
<br>>>(Doesn't this make you want to run out and get yourself a whole mess o'
<br>>>standards docs?)  Anyway, I'm wondering if the original construction is
<br>>>proper,
<br>>>grammatically speaking; is "other than" a separable construction?
<br>>>Certainly it
<br>>>is difficult for me to parse.  Personally I would have omitted the first
<br>>>"other"
<br>>>in both cases, but the standard was already finalized before I ever set
<br>>>my eyes
<br>>>on it (and they're rolling around with great abandon there!)
<br>>>
<br>>>Andrea Vine
<br>>>Software i18n consultant
<br>>>Sun Internet Mail Server
<br>>>avine[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE]eng.sun.com
<br>>>--------------------
<br>>>bite the wax tadpole
<br>>
<br>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
<br>>
<br>>If I understand your posting, your "other X's other than Y's" is your
<br>>"correction."  I say "other X's than Y's" and consider your construction
<br>>to have an unnecessary redundancy.
<br>>
<br>>As I asked before: Geek grammar rules?
<br>>
<br>>By the way, we vets say you've misspelled fubar.
<br>>
<br>>
<br>(I had intended the msg with single < > to go to ads-l, but Andrea has her
<br>e-mail set up so that replies go to her rather than to ads-l.)
<br>
<br>DMLance
<br>