in reply to Re^2: PERL as shibboleth and the Perl community
in thread PERL as shibboleth and the Perl community

Being a linguist does not prevent one from wanting to make fine distinctions when such distinctions are useful. Being a linguist also means that you understand it's okay to ignore those distinctions when they aren't useful. Case distinctions are particularly nice when you want to have it both ways. I have several T-shirts in my closet that say PERL, and yes, that does bother me just a little. Nevertheless, I do not refuse to wear them because of that. A linguist cannot afford to confuse utility with principle.
  • Comment on Re^3: PERL as shibboleth and the Perl community

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: PERL as shibboleth and the Perl community
by thor (Priest) on Nov 22, 2005 at 17:43 UTC
    I'm no linguist, so I might be just flapping my virtual gums, but it seems to me that when a given spelling means two or more different things in natural language, it's for historical reasons. For example, I'm sure that "dessert" was not designed to mean all of "a dry place", "a small meal after the main meal", and "to leave". It just kind of happened that way. I'd have to imagine that one of the finer points in learning a new language is distinguishing between words that are spelled the same. So, when it is said that it was intentional overloading of one spelling to mean multiple things, I have to scratch my head.

    thor

    Feel the white light, the light within
    Be your own disciple, fan the sparks of will
    For all of us waiting, your kingdom will come

[reply]
[reply]
        You're right...rats! Not because you were right, but because I need to learn how to spell. My original point still stands, though.

        thor

        Feel the white light, the light within
        Be your own disciple, fan the sparks of will
        For all of us waiting, your kingdom will come

[reply]

In Section Meditations