From: owner-frc-digest To: frc-digest@nvg.unit.no Subject: frc-digest V1 #141 Reply-To: frc Errors-To: owner-frc-digest Precedence: bulk frc-digest Thursday, 30 March 1995 Volume 01 : Number 141 Re: Rule 33:5 Re: Rule 33:5 Missing Rules Re: Missing Rules Re: Rule 33:5 Judgments Re: Judgments Re: Jeremy's Rule 33:5? More Judgments OOOPS!$#$#@$#@$#$@#$#@$@#$#@$ Summary ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Orjan Johansen Date: Wed, 29 Mar 1995 09:02:15 +0200 (MET DST) Subject: Re: Rule 33:5 On Tue, 28 Mar 1995, Don Blaheta wrote: > Oerjan rules: > > > ==== > > To enfoers Sekond Prinsiepl, following letter kombinations in futuer > ^^ ^ > > aer respeelld as follows: > ^ ^^ As I haev already eksplaiend, "futuer" does not inklued "this senteens". > > 'ay','ey' -> 'ae' > > 'ow' -> 'oe' > > 'ea','ei' -> 'ee' > > 'ew' -> 'ue' > > Alsoe, siengl letters 'a'e, 'o'e, 'e'e, and 'u'e will from noe on haev an > > 'e'e added when thae aer pronouensd long. > ^ I doen't knoe about you, but I pronouens that "o"e as a week "e"e. > Vanyel Greetings, Oerjan. ------------------------------ From: Don Blaheta Date: Wed, 29 Mar 1995 01:15:02 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: Rule 33:5 Oerjan rebuts: > On Tue, 28 Mar 1995, Don Blaheta wrote: > > > Oerjan rules: > > > > > ==== > > > To enfoers Sekond Prinsiepl, following letter kombinations in futuer > > ^^ ^ > > > aer respeelld as follows: > > ^ ^^ > > As I haev already eksplaiend, "futuer" does not inklued "this senteens". Each rule must comply with all current rules, *including itself*. But, whatever. It's up to the Judge. > > > 'ay','ey' -> 'ae' > > > 'ow' -> 'oe' > > > 'ea','ei' -> 'ee' > > > 'ew' -> 'ue' > > > Alsoe, siengl letters 'a'e, 'o'e, 'e'e, and 'u'e will from noe on haev an > > > 'e'e added when thae aer pronouensd long. > > ^ > > I doen't knoe about you, but I pronouens that "o"e as a week "e"e. Weelllllll.... okay. > > Vanyel > > Greetings, > Oerjan. Vanyel =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-+-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Don Blaheta | GAT d?(--) H+ s-:- g-(+) p?>! !au a-- w+ v+ C++(+++) USL blahedo@quincy.edu| !3 E--- N++ K- W--- M++ !v -po+ Y+ t++>+++ 5- jx R(+) G+ dblaheta@aol.com | tv-- b+++ D--- B-- e(*)(+>+++) u++ h(*) f+ r-- n---- !y* =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-+-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= ------------------------------ From: KUNNE@crnvma.cern.ch Date: Wed, 29 Mar 95 09:39:17 SET Subject: Missing Rules Could some kind soul repost all the Rules after 33:3 (the last of which I saw the Judgment). By some stupid manoeuvre I happened to delete my Round33 file *and* its backup. Thank you, Ronald ------------------------------ From: Don Blaheta Date: Wed, 29 Mar 1995 02:21:59 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: Missing Rules Don't worry, none of them have been judged yet either... just up through 3. Believe me... I'm waiting for the Judgment on 4, because that will of course greatly affect any Rule I post.... Vanyel =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-+-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Don Blaheta | GAT d?(--) H+ s-:- g-(+) p?>! !au a-- w+ v+ C++(+++) USL blahedo@quincy.edu| !3 E--- N++ K- W--- M++ !v -po+ Y+ t++>+++ 5- jx R(+) G+ dblaheta@aol.com | tv-- b+++ D--- B-- e(*)(+>+++) u++ h(*) f+ r-- n---- !y* =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-+-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= ------------------------------ From: Orjan Johansen Date: Wed, 29 Mar 1995 12:24:54 +0200 (MET DST) Subject: Re: Rule 33:5 On Wed, 29 Mar 1995, Don Blaheta wrote: > Oerjan rebuts: > > > As I haev already eksplaiend, "futuer" does not inklued "this senteens". > > Each rule must comply with all current rules, *including itself*. But, > whatever. It's up to the Judge. In which case my 33:1 should have been invalid, as it doesn't move silent 'e's. I don't agree with your interpretation, anyhow. A Rule is free to restrict its application - this has always been custom, and we have had Rounds with Rules requiring all Rules to obey their own restriction, as well as Rounds where Rules were required to not obey their own restrictions, which was deemed OK as long as the Rules were formulated in such a way as to make clear their restrictions only applied to future/other Rules. On the other hand, Rules which have failed to make clear that their restrictions not apply to themselves (usually by using "Rules" when "future Rules" was intended) have been invalidated, which may explain why you have got the impression that Rules must always apply to themselves. > Vanyel Greetings, Oerjan. ------------------------------ From: Richard Chatham Date: Wed, 29 Mar 1995 11:59:33 -0500 Subject: Judgments 33:4 from Andre is VALID --- +1 Style Point 33:5 from Oerjan is at this moment undecided: in my judgment "from now on" in the last provision makes that provision apply to 33:5. The question is whether I should declare that "pronounced" has a long "o" sound, or whether I should accept Oerjan's alternate pronunciation..... My judgments on subsequent rules depend on how I rule on 33:5. More judgments will be posted late tonight... Sincerely, Doug Chatham ------------------------------ From: Jeremy D Selengut Date: Wed, 29 Mar 1995 13:13:00 EST Subject: Re: Judgments The Judge writes: > in my judgment > "from now on" in the last provision makes that provision apply to > 33:5 Doesn't this mean that the "futuer"/"fuetuer" discrepancy is still at issue? - - Jeremy ------------------------------ From: "WB" Date: Wed, 29 Mar 1995 17:30:07 -0500 Subject: Re: Jeremy's Rule 33:5? On Mar 28, 11:00am, Jeremy D Selengut wrote: > Subject: Rule 33:5? > 3) definition: 'silent e' is when an 'e' is uesd such that sound of > preseding vowl is alterd by its presens, but 'e' itself has no > sound. a 'non-pronounsd e' is oen which has no sound and no efect on ^^^^^ Shouldn't that be "efekt"? Mike - -- Michael J. Haisma | Any questions, comments, or flames? email: mjhaisma@eos.ncsu.edu | Please send email to president@whitehouse.gov ------------------------------ From: Richard Chatham Date: Wed, 29 Mar 1995 18:08:10 -0500 Subject: More Judgments I have checked the American Heritage Dictionary: the "o" in the first syllable of "pronounced" is NOT a long o, but rather a "schwa" (symbol: upside-down e) sound. "Future" does NOT have a long "u" sound in it, either. The rest of Oerjan's 33:5 seems to be OK, so I declare it VALID and award +1 Style Points. Note: From now on, unless a rule states otherwise (or very clearly implies otherwise) I will assume that words are to have the same meaning and pronounciation they have in standard English. I will use the American Heritage Dictionary as a primary source, though I welcome quotes from other dictionaries and reference materials. (The Oxford English Dict. would be better, of course, but using it would mean trips to the library....) I will now check the rest of the Fantasy Rules. Please continue to send notes when you see possible errors. Sincerely, Somewhat chagrined over mispronouncing "pronounce" all these years, Doug Chatham, Judge ------------------------------ From: Richard Chatham Date: Wed, 29 Mar 1995 18:22:32 -0500 Subject: OOOPS!$#$#@$#@$#$@#$#@$@#$#@$ Great. This is what I get for not checking carefully enough. "Respelled"most definitely has a long "e" sound. unfortunately, I've already declared 33:5 as VALID. In 33:6 from Selengut, the "c" in "efect" should be a "k". I therefore declare 33:6 INVALID, but I do award 1 Style Point. (Sorry) For future reference, "from now on" includes the current rule. I would not object to a proposal to declare 33:5 INVALID. Sincerely, Doug Chatham ------------------------------ From: Richard Chatham Date: Wed, 29 Mar 1995 18:34:45 -0500 Subject: Summary Just to summarize recent transactions 33:4 from Andre VALID 1 Style Point Welcome Andre! 33:5 from Oerjan VALID 1 Style Point I should have judged INVALID, but I was careless. 33:6 from Jeremy INVALID 1 Style Point The Judge will be using a dictionary to confirm correct pronounciations and word meanings. A complete list of the Fantasy Rules made so far in this round will be posted by tomorrow afternoon (all times EST). Looking forward to more interesting rules, Anticipating the overturning of all his decisions, Yours truly, Doug Chatham, Judge ------------------------------ End of frc-digest V1 #141 *************************