End of ADS-L Digest - 4 Aug 1994 to 5 Aug 1994

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







There are 2 messages totalling 76 lines in this issue.



Topics of the day:



 1. Bounced Mail

 2. new word contest



----------------------------------------------------------------------



Date:  Sat, 6 Aug 1994 06:48:07 -0500

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

Subject: Bounced Mail



When including something from a previous posting, be sure to edit out

ADS-L in the headers of the old mail. Otherwise your message will bounce.



> Date:     Fri, 5 Aug 1994 12:49:25 -0400

> From: BITNET list server at UGA (1.7f) <LISTSERV[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE]uga.cc.uga.edu>

> Subject:   ADS-L: error report from VIOLET.BERKELEY.EDU

> To: Natalie Maynor <MAYNOR[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE]RA.MSSTATE.EDU>

>

> The enclosed mail file, found in the ADS-L reader and shown under the spoolid

> 3720 in the console 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 (67 lines) -------------------------

> Date: Fri, 5 Aug 1994 09:47:44 -0700

> From: ctlntt[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE]violet.berkeley.edu

> Subject: Re: Forrest Gump

>

>  David Johns observed Martin Sheen's difficulty in doing Gen. Lee's accent

>  for "Gettysburg," and the difficulty of getting accents right.

>

>  Mike Picone talked about the larger problems in the

>  motion picture industry.

>

>  I agree with David that maybe it's too much to expect for non[native

>  speakers to get it exactly right. But I do not think much of an effort

>  is made. I have a lot of respect for Martin Sheen as an actor and a

>  human being; I can't help thinking that he might have done better if the

>  director had made that a bigger part of the the role.

>

>  Which gets me to Mike's point. Yes, there is a lot of arrogance in the

>  movie/TV industries. And I suppose it ticks me off as a professional

>  linguist/dialectologist that a lot of what we know gets ignored by the

>  people who produce this stuff. And I supose part of being ticked off has

>  sg. to do with the failure of the culture at large to take what we know

>  about language variation very seriously. The press invariably reports on

>  any research in dialectology--even the appearance of a humongous project

>  like DARE--very humorously, with a lot of jokes. That's a bummer sometimes.

>

>    Tim Frazer

>

> Hmmm -- Is it "the failure of the culture at large to take what we know

> . . . very seriously" or is it rather our failure as professionals to

> impress upon the culture at large that what we know is worthy of its

> attention? Scholars from other fields --theologians, for example--

> might make a similar comment. Somehow T. Frazer's comment ties up very

> naturally with recent debates on topics such as mainstream vs. nonmainstream

> linguistics and popularization. Assuming that the subjects of our study

> and research are intrinsically important, the unanswered question is

> how to convince the general public that this is the case. It cannot be

> said that the profession has been particularly successful in doing this.

>

> M. Azevedo

> UCBerkeley

> ctlntt[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE]violet.berkeley.edu

>