discuss: the good the bad and the ugly
Subject:
Re: the good the bad and the ugly
From:
Rahul Sundaram ####@####.####
Date:
22 Nov 2003 04:39:39 -0000
Message-Id: <200311221009.20092.rahulsundaram@yahoo.co.in>
On Saturday 22 November 2003 09:47, you wrote:
> At 19:12 11/21/2003, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> >On Saturday 22 November 2003 03:47, Martin WHEELER wrote:
> > > Now, *that* is a beautiful example of just how severely you can
> > > (probably unwittingly) piss people with my degree of language
> > > sensibility off.
> >
> >no. i never made any claims. [...] so i dont understand what you feel
> >offended
> >about. It wasnt some hidden attack on your writing abilities or your age
>
> Gentlemen, please... enough already.
>
> My mother tongue is Spanish, and I have had the fortune to learn some
> Portuguese and French (in the meantime getting the opportunity to speak
> with all sorts of Latin American, French, and Brazilian natives whose
> second language is English and who speak/write/murder it with varying
> degrees of success, from Tarzan-like grunts to poetry worthy of the Bard
> himself. As such, allow me to suggest I have had some experience with
> interpretation. I may even so get flamed for this post, but the hell with
> it.
>
> Martin: Rahul speaks (writes, whatever...) English rather well.
> Nevertheless, his style is rather short (perhaps not an excellent typist
> and so seeks brevity), and there are thought and diction patterns peculiar
> to the languages of the Indian subcontinent which simply do not translate
> well to English constructs. In my humble opinion (having coexisted with a
> college roommate from India for three years), Rahul really did not mean to
> offend and was not in any way attacking you. Note the somewhat awkward
> phrasing of the infamous "this was accepted by you" comment, whose INTENDED
> meaning is far closer to "you yourself admitted." Be somewhat tolerant that
> his English grammar and spelling are excellent but that does not mean he
> has full (and by "full" I mean "native") of some idioms you take for
> granted. In short, cut the guy some slack... he is trying to help, and he
> is _not_ trying to slap you down.
>
> Rahul: You need to keep in mind that some people _will_ misunderstand a few
> of the word structures you use sometimes, especially if you write two-line
> messages. While I accept that you did not intend to slap Martin around,
> your offhand instruction to "retire the howto" was read (even by me) as
> cavalier, dismissive, and callous. The above "this was accepted by you"
> comment was also destined to be misread, and then finally telling him to to
> "use his valuable time" (which sounded sarcastic to him) probably threw him
> over the edge. When in doubt, write a longer message, make your point more
> clearly... just use _more_words_ and your meaning will come across better.
> Martin is not crazy... while his interpretation of your intent was wrong,
> it was also reasonable mistake to make.
>
> Now, could you two shake hands and be friends? It's unlike both of you to
> fight like this.
It was not my intent to fight at all. I am trying to explain things.
Unfortunately seems to work in the wrong way. I was not at all sarcastic
about Martin. I appreciate your efforts in this
Regards
Rahul Sundaram
