Date:  Thu, 18 Apr 1996 10:26:21 -0500

From:  Natalie Maynor <maynor[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE]RA.MSSTATE.EDU>

Subject: Bounced Mail



****************************************************************

 REMINDER: WHEN INCLUDING A PREVIOUS LIST POSTING IN SOMETHING

 YOU'RE SENDING TO THE LIST, BE SURE TO EDIT OUT ALL REFERENCES

 TO ADS-L IN THE HEADERS.

****************************************************************

> Date:     Thu, 18 Apr 1996 10:53:03 -0400

> From: "L-Soft list server at UGA (1.8b)" <LISTSERV[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE]uga.cc.uga.edu>

> Subject:   ADS-L: error report from GUVAX.ACC.GEORGETOWN.EDU

>

>The enclosed message, found in the ADS-L mailbox and shown under the spool ID

>6474 in the system log, has been identified as a possible delivery error notice

>for the following reason: "Sender:", "From:" or "Reply-To:" field pointing to

>the list has been found in mail body.

>

>------------------- Message in error (49 lines) --------------------------

> Date: Thu, 18 Apr 1996 10:52:53 -0400 (EDT)

> From: "Peter L. Patrick" <PPATRICK[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE]guvax.acc.georgetown.edu>

> Subject: Re: On those Bobdolisms

>

> > Subj:    RE: On those Bobdolisms

>

> On the use of 3rd-person self-reference by FN+LN in public speech,

> esp. to the media, Chris Brooks wrote about Indonesian:

>

> > My feeling here is that--in contrast to the self-promotional or

> > dispassionate historical attitude toward oneself--the use of the

> > proper name in place of the pronoun in Indonesian is a humbling

> > device, at least as far as the speaker goes.

>

> Writing from Washington, though, I suspect the norms here are very

> different, at least for the usage by politicians. Unlike the sports

> figures, these folks often DON'T do their own scripting; the people

> who do write comments for them may be the same ones who write press

> releases *about* them; and the pols are used to thinking about their

> message in 3rd-p terms, too, I'd bet, from campaign and other promo

> experiences. The more distance the speaker has from their public

> persona, perhaps the easier it is to project a coherent, fully two-

> dimensional portrait composed of only that-which-will-sell. While no

> doubt these folks are egocentric, they also are pretty image-aware and

> I suspect that they're really NOT referring to their "selves" when

> they use the FN+LN reference.

>    Also, I believe I've noticed-- impressionistically, of

> course-- that when politicians comment negatively on each other, they

> may use either LN or FN+LN, but when they comment positively they tend

> to use TLN or FN+LN predominantly. I wonder if anyone has ever done

> such a study in public-affairs discourse? So much has been written

> about address, but I know of less on this sort of reference (not

> counting syntactic treatments, of course).

>    (I also found Larry's and Joan's comments very helpful.)

>        --peter patrick

>