




From: "Jerry D. Harris" <LOKICORP@COMPUSERVE.COM>
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 19:36:16 -0400
Subject: Re: [NO] Multilingual joking

Here in New Mexico, where more than half of the population is of Hispanic
descent, many natives (particularly, I've found, newscasters) go to great
lengths to speak a fairly flawless, unaccented English, but when they come
to Spanish words, an accent very suddenly appears and then disappears at
the end of the word.  They go to great lengths to properly pronounce
Spanish words.  Of course, when it comes to words from _other_ languages,
they don't care at _all_, and they always get mangled...  8-P

 _,_
 ____/_\,) .. _
--____-===( _\/ \\/ \-----_---__
 /\ ' ^__/>/\____\--------
__________/__\_ ____________________________.//__.//_________

 Jerry D. Harris
 Fossil Preparation Lab
 New Mexico Museum of Natural History
 1801 Mountain Rd NW
 Albuquerque NM 87104-1375
 Phone: (505) 899-2809
 Fax: (505) 841-2866
 102354.2222@compuserve.com





From: Richard Kennedy <r.a.kennedy@BHAM.AC.UK>
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 19:58:15 +0100
Subject: Re: Folds wanted - Mallard (train)

>
> Does anybody have a diagram of an Ichthyosaur? Also a diagram of the Mallard
> Train? I have just finished my version of the Mallard and I want to compare.

I believe that Max Hulme did create an origami version of the Mallard (and
some other famous trains). I'll ask him next time I see him (hopefully at
the end of August).

Richard K
(R.A.Kennedy@bham.ac.uk)





From: Donna & Robin <robin@RGLYNN.KEME.CO.UK>
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 20:14:04 +0100
Subject: Re: bog standard

-----Original Message-----
From: Nick Robinson <nick@CHEESYPEAS.DEMON.CO.UK>
To: ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU <ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Date: 28 July 1999 10:11
Subject: bog standard

>Can't let this thread pass without mentioning one of Dave Brill's lesser
>known modules, inspired rumour has it, whilst, errr, heaving Havanas.
>The Brill's Own Toilet Tissue Origami Module (or BOTTOM) is a pentagonal
>unit derived from hand towels in a Birmingham loo. Not exactly s-turdy,
>but ideal for boginners, flushed with success from their paper
>movements. He drew diagrams, then needed them urgently!
>
>I'm certain Dave can corroborate my tale....
>

Thanks Nick, that gives me something to go on.





From: Daniela Carboni <s134259@STUDENTI.ING.UNIPI.IT>
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 20:19:39 +0200
Subject: misspelling of "origami"

>Another thing: how many people have seen origami misspelled as "oragami"?
>Another case of Anglophone mispronunciation.

Here in Italy it is often spelled something like "origano" (in English:
oregano) and not to mention the syllabic accent.

/\_/\        Daniela S. Carboni
 o o     Rocket Scientist & Origamist
= # =    email: rednina@tiscalinet.it





From: Meristein@AOL.COM
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 21:19:04 -0400 (
Subject: Re: bog standard

Aw, c'mon, Nick; you're just pulling my chain with this story; there's a
gaping hole in the plot.

Merida





From: Shalom LeVine <shalom.levine@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 21:20:18 -0400
Subject: Re: [NO] Multilingual joking

As one of my Rabbis in Seminary said, a language isn't just another way to
say "rose", but reflects the mores and culture of the society that developed
that language. As a multi-lingual (by force; I lived in different countries
during my life) I can attest to the fact that there are words and phrases
that simply do not translate into other languages, but can only be
understood by those that live with that language.

Shalom

-----Original Message-----
From: Kimberly Shuck <atsina@HOOKED.NET>
To: ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU <ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Date: Wednesday, July 28, 1999 8:51 PM
Subject: Re: [NO] Multilingual joking

>I agree Marty. I write poetry in both English and my native language,
Tsalagi.
>I've never been quite able to translate either to the other. The music
inherent
>in one language is not the same in another.... although I fancy that I'm
>reasonably fluent in both. Nuts to your high school poetry teacher.
>Kim
>
>marty wrote:
>>
>> I claim the translated poem is a new poem on the same subject. The sound
of
>> the words and rythym (sp?) are usually VERY important in poetry and since
>> the sound of words with the same meaning have no relation to one another
in
>> two different languages, I claim poetry translation is impossible.
Perhaps i
>> should say exact poetry translation is impossible.
>> By the way -- my high school english teacher did not buy my argument
either
>> in 1947.





From: Meristein@AOL.COM
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 21:20:18 -0400 (
Subject: Re: [NO] Multilingual joking (was Re: Toilet Paper End Folding or)

In a message dated 7/28/99 3:21:16 PM, you wrote:

<<Of course the best butchers of English
are we Americans>>

You mean "us Americans"?





From: italic <italic@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 21:26:07 -0500
Subject: Re: misspelling of "origami"

----- Original Message -----
From: Christopher Holt <Ella-mae@EMAIL.MSN.COM>
To: <ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 1999 7:43 PM
Subject: Re: misspelling of "origami"

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Joseph Wu <josephwu@ULTRANET.CA>
> > I'm curious about your examples, too. I believe you meant to type
> "missiOn"
> > and "cotilliOn". If not, I'd be interested in hearing you speak! 8)
> >
>  Actually it would be "missIOn", as the two vowels form a schwa sound and
> "cotillion" has an "io" that acts as a dipthong of the 'y' sound with a
> schwa'd 'o' acting in conjuction. Let's not make this a discussion that we
> have to dig up Webster sort out. Of course, when you can get great tidbits
> of information out of it (Ahuru Mazda- Persian god of light and goodness
> (sounds like Sarah Lee to me) is a reference I will never forget now,
thanks
> to Joseph) it's valuable, or, unless we're moving into a venue for folding
> language. I'm game...  All the best - c!!!





From: Bruce Stephens <bruce@CENDERIS.DEMON.CO.UK>
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 21:39:12 +0100
Subject: Re: Kawasaki Rose

Mark and Theresa <mark@HOBBITON.FORCE9.NET> writes:

> It's my (our!) wedding anniversary today so I thought I'd try the
> aforementioned flower for Theresa. She's now got a pretty plant pot
> stand! I get to the step which, in OftC, says something like grab
> the diagonals and curl the creases marked "l". That's where the
> problem lies - all I get is a square based object with vertical
> sides!

It's easy once you've done it a few times, honestly.  Try pushing the
corners together slightly---the whole square contracts a little.

Another thing you might try is continuing the slightly off-diagonal
diagonal creases all the way across the square.  That way it's easier
to fiddle around with it to get to something that looks like the step
after the twist fold.

After that it becomes intrinsically three-dimensional.  The only tip I
can offer there is to make as many of the subsequent steps as possible
on each side separately (unfolding them before doing the next), since
otherwise the whole thing gets sort of cramped, and I find it a bit
awkward to make the folds cleanly.





From: Eric Andersen <ema@NETSPACE.ORG>
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 21:42:57 -0400
Subject: misspelling "origami"

On Wed, 28 Jul 1999, Joseph Wu wrote:

>Another thing: how many people have seen origami misspelled as "oragami"?
>Another case of Anglophone mispronunciation.

This is quite frustrating indeed. People are constantly emailing me with
questions about such obscure and bizarre arts as "orgami", "oregami", and
"oragani". I'm afraid the first two are the result of another
mispronunciation, one which gives "origami" only three syllables, cutting
out the first "i" altogether. I can see Joseph's example, but how would
this three-syllable mispronuncation come about?

-Eric :-P
origami@paperfolding.com

/=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=\
\   Eric Andersen                                       /
/    Mathematics, Music             ~  ~ __o            \
\     and Origami                 ~  ~ _-\<'_           /
/      ema@netspace.org        ~    ~ (_)/ (_)          \
\=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=/
         *** http://www.paperfolding.com ***





From: Julia Palffy <jupalffy@BLUEWIN.CH>
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 22:55:19 +0200
Subject: Re: [NO] Multilingual joking (was Re: Toilet Paper End Folding or)

Well, the misuse of words (mispronounced, miswritten, meaning modified)
from one language in another is an old story, and English gets its share of
butchering in French (Franglais) and German (Amideutsch)... and Japanese
too, for that matter. The day one of my Japanese friends told me to go and
get grass (!) to try a new drink, it took me a quarter of an hour to figure
out the connection!
And does anyone in Anglo-Saxon countries know what 'un 'brushing'' means in
French? (well, the Canadians might...)

Julia Palffy
Zug, Switzerland
jupalffy@bluewin.ch





From: Peter Budai <peterbud@MAIL.DATATRANS.HU>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 00:59:21 -0400
Subject: Re: Tanteidan "Newsletter"

At 02:08 PM 7/27/99 -0400, you wrote:

>Has anyone outside of Japan received the new magazine that replaced the
>Tanteidan Newsletter?

I received the first "new" one (with harder color cover) just before
setting off to the OUSA Convention, and got the second "new" number just
today morning!

Happy folding,

Peter Budai





From: Peter Budai <peterbud@MAIL.DATATRANS.HU>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 00:59:27 -0400
Subject: Re: Elephanthide

At 12:38 PM 7/27/99 -0700, you wrote:

>>>Robert recommended Elephant paper, here comes my question: is it acid
>>>free?
>>
>> Well, it did not burn the skin off my hands... ;-)
>
>Yeah, dude, just don't use the brown stuff!

The brown one? Maybe I'm missing the particular brown you're mentioning.
BUT well, I've had surprisingly green experiences with the black one! ;-)

Happy folding,

Peter Budai





From: Valerie Vann <valerie_vann@COMPUSERVE.COM>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 02:24:07 -0400
Subject: Mallard Train

<<Mallard Train diagrams...Max Hulme

I don't have it to hand right now, but I believe
some editions of Paul Jackson's Encyclopedia of Origami
and Papercraft have photos and diagrams of the Mallard
model.

Valerie





From: Sandra P Hoffman <ghidra@CONSCOOP.OTTAWA.ON.CA>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 05:51:13 -0400
Subject: Re: misspelling of "origami"

On Wed, 28 Jul 1999, Joseph Wu wrote:
>
> Only for uninformed Anglophones. Origami is a Japanese word, and is properly
> pronounced "oh-ree-gah-mee" with equal stress on all syllables.

In my opinion it's ok to anglicize the pronunciation and even the spelling
of non-english words for use in English. It's also ok to do the same in
other languages when bringing English words into those languages. Dialects
of English that have varient pronunciations from upper class British
pronunciations are also fine. Language is alive. It will flow and adapt to
the needs and desires of the everyday speakers.

I believe purists have tried to maintain Victorian English as a standard,
not realizing that it is only the Victorian English who ever cared to try
to halt the natural patterns of change in languages over time.

The popular
> Anglophone (or should I say American?) pronunciation is "or-ah-GAAAAAAA-mee"
> (with the "ah" representing the schwa), and is way off base.

But closer to the natural sounds and rhythms of the dialect of the
speaker. People are more likely to use a word that they can adapt to
the patterns of their native dialect. In my opinion there are no ugly or
improper dialects of English, only great variety and beauty, and an
endlessly fascinating process of adaptation and adoption.

sph

Sandra P. Hoffman ghidra@conscoop.ottawa.on.ca
http://www.flora.org/sandra/
----------------------------
The one small garden of a free gardener was all his need and due,
not a garden swollen to a realm;
his own hands to use,
not the hands of others to command. --Sam Gamgee





From: Sandra P Hoffman <ghidra@CONSCOOP.OTTAWA.ON.CA>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 06:10:57 -0400
Subject: Re: [NO] Multilingual joking

On Wed, 28 Jul 1999, marty wrote:

> I claim the translated poem is a new poem on the same subject. The sound of
> the words and rythym (sp?) are usually VERY important in poetry and since
> the sound of words with the same meaning have no relation to one another in
> two different languages,

Good translators of poetry have to be totally immersed in the sounds and
rhythms of both languages and have an immense vocabulary. It can be done,
but it is very, very difficult. Most translations of poetry are, as you
say, new poems on the same theme.

> I claim poetry translation is impossible. Perhaps i
> should say exact poetry translation is impossible.

Exact translation of any kind is pretty much impossible.

> By the way -- my high school english teacher did not buy my argument either
> in 1947.

By time I was in University in the late seventies early eighties, the
problems of translating poetry and other literature where the rhythms
and sounds of the language carry a significant part of the meaning were
pretty much understood. At that time I was reading material on the
difficulties of translating Russian classics into English, and on
translating Medieval English poetry into Modern English. The latter being
especially difficult to do well.

sph
>

Sandra P. Hoffman ghidra@conscoop.ottawa.on.ca
http://www.flora.org/sandra/
----------------------------
The one small garden of a free gardener was all his need and due,
not a garden swollen to a realm;
his own hands to use,
not the hands of others to command. --Sam Gamgee





From: Sandra P Hoffman <ghidra@CONSCOOP.OTTAWA.ON.CA>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 06:36:17 -0400
Subject: Re: misspelling "origami"

On Wed, 28 Jul 1999, Eric Andersen wrote:

> On Wed, 28 Jul 1999, Joseph Wu wrote:
>
> >Another thing: how many people have seen origami misspelled as "oragami"?
> >Another case of Anglophone mispronunciation.
>
> This is quite frustrating indeed. People are constantly emailing me with
> questions about such obscure and bizarre arts as "orgami", "oregami", and
> "oragani". I'm afraid the first two are the result of another
> mispronunciation, one which gives "origami" only three syllables, cutting
> out the first "i" altogether. I can see Joseph's example, but how would
> this three-syllable mispronuncation come about?

In my dialect of English, I would pronounce the i as the shortest sound in
the word. Someone hearing me speak and never having seen the word written
down might not catch that syllable at all and thus write orgami.

As for the other pronunciations mentioned in this thread, I was born in
Gloucestershire, England and lived there till I was 8. We pronounced the
word Glostershur. Similarly when we would visit Worcester we said we were
going to Wooster. However while these pronunciations were acceptable to
all and sundry, high and low, I remember being drilled in school to say
Haich not aich. My lower class rural dialect dropped the aich. Imagine a
classroom full of children all standing in rows rhyming "Haich not aich"
over and over again for several minutes everyday. It was quite a culture
shock to come to Canada and have everyone look at me as if I was nuts when
I said haich in spelling class.

sph

Sandra P. Hoffman ghidra@conscoop.ottawa.on.ca
http://www.flora.org/sandra/
----------------------------
The one small garden of a free gardener was all his need and due,
not a garden swollen to a realm;
his own hands to use,
not the hands of others to command. --Sam Gamgee





From: DLister891@AOL.COM
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 07:08:11 -0400 (
Subject: Re: [NO] Multilingual Joking.

In her posting yesterday Merida quoted :

"Of course the best butchers of English are we Americans."

and commented:

"You mean "us Americans"? "

I don't know whether or not Merida intended this to be a leg-pull. But I'll
take it that she was being serious. (Or as serious as anyone can be in this
theme of discussion, which is somewhat remote from origami.)

Gramatically, in the quoted sentence, "we Americans" is correct because it is
not an object of the verb, which would take the accusative case, but is
predicative, in that it refers to the subject of the sentence. Accordingly,
it takes the nominative case.

Case distinctions have virtually disappeared in English and anyway, were
probably over-imposed on the language by the early grammarians who, being
educated in the classical languages, tried to force English into the mould of
Latin grammar.

To the queation: "Who's there?" the reply is invariably: "It's me."
According to the rules of formal grammar, it should be "It's I". But that
would sound so impossibly stilted that usage has clearly left formal grammar
far behind. Practical grammar is no more than an analysis of language as it
is actually spoken and written. (There ain't never nothing so truer than
that.)

Yet some things do grate. Children have been rigorously drilled not to say:
"Mary and me are going to a party", when it should be: "Mary and I are going
to a party".  As a result, they avoid the phrase, "Mary and me" at all costs,
even when the words are used as the object of a sentence. Then "Mary and me"
is, indeed correct. Hence we have such tortured over-correction from adults
as well as children in expressions like: "Billy is going to invite Mary and I
to his party." or "between you and I".

This is becoming an exceedingly common error when people are trying to speak
formally and because it is frankly an unecessary over-correction, it grates
harshly. I often hear educated people use it, people who should know better,
among them politicians, lecturers and and bishops. So does our local
newspaper.

People go even further with their over-correction. Instead of saying: "The
seminar will be conducted by Mr. Brown and me", the speaker, sensing somehow
that "Mr. Brown and me" is somehow incorrect,  will change the expression to:
"The seminar will be conducted by Mr Brown and myself". So he ends by using
the word "myself" incorrectly, when "me" in this context would have been
perfectly correct. His last state is worse than his first.

I can put up with "It's me", because it's a natural mistake, but not "When
are you going to visit Joan and I", because that is not a natural mistake; it
is a self-imposed, but misconceived confomity to a misunderstood rule.
Whenever we are watching television together, Margaret stoically has to put
up with a incessant stream of agonosed howls of protest from me as this error
is constantly perpetrated.

No doubt liberal linguitic stylists will disagree. I'd better get of my high
horse quickly, before I fall off.

David Lister.





From: Phil and Amy <sgt.schulz@POSTOFFICE.WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 08:14:22 +0000
Subject: Re: 2" paper:

Kyle Barger wrote:
>I recently bought a pack of 2" paper as an impulse purchase.  I've never
>worked with anything smaller than 4" paper and I'm wondering what are good
>folds to try with paper this size.

Joseph Wu's One-Fold Stegosaur comes to mind. . .

sgt.schulz@worldnet.att.net
 Origami Star Wars at:
http://home.att.net/~sgt.schulz/





From: Nick Robinson <nick@CHEESYPEAS.DEMON.CO.UK>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 08:23:18 +0100
Subject: Re: bog standard

Meristein@AOL.COM sez

>there's a
>gaping hole in the plot.

Is this chain mail or are you just papering over the cracks?

cheers,

Nick Robinson
nick@cheesypeas.demon.co.uk

***      What do you call 50 banjos in a canal?      A start.....     ***





From: Andrew Daw <andrewd@REDAC.CO.UK>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 08:29:16 +0100
Subject: Re: Folds wanted

The short answer is NO, but I am sure some of the more competent designers on
the list can modify a Dolphin design to match ;o)

If you are not sure what an Ichthyosaur looks like I have found a picture at:

http://www.nationalgeographic.com/media/ngm/9607/0111.html

If anyone does come up with a design (complete with the bug-eyes) I'd love to
see it :)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Origami Mailing List [mailto:Origami@MIT.Edu]On Behalf Of Leigh
> Halford
> Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 1999 7:30 PM
> To: ORIGAMI@MITVMA.MIT.EDU
> Subject: Folds wanted
>
>
> Does anybody have a diagram of an Ichthyosaur? Also a diagram of the Mallard
> Train? I have just finished my version of the Mallard and I want to compare.
> Ta





From: Phil and Amy <sgt.schulz@POSTOFFICE.WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 08:30:27 +0000
Subject: Re: Just Joined

Hi, Leigh! I like your Star Wars designs.  I think it's neat to see the
juxtaposition between Hi-tech science-fiction and low technology Origami (by
low tech, I mean the paper, not the skills needed to fold and create.
Sheesh, that's a potential misunderstanding that could get me lynched here!)

Phil

sgt.schulz@worldnet.att.net
 Origami Star Wars at:
http://home.att.net/~sgt.schulz/





From: "Jerry D. Harris" <LOKICORP@COMPUSERVE.COM>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 09:23:19 -0400
Subject: Re: [NO] Multilingual Joking.

Message text written by Origami List
>"Of course the best butchers of English are we Americans."

and commented:

"You mean "us Americans"? "

I don't know whether or not Merida intended this to be a leg-pull. But I'll
take it that she was being serious. <

        Naw, I thought Merida was being facetious -- while "we Americans"
is grammatically correct, most actual Americans really do say "us
Americans"...hence the irony!

 _,_
 ____/_\,) .. _
--____-===( _\/ \\/ \-----_---__
 /\ ' ^__/>/\____\--------
__________/__\_ ____________________________.//__.//_________

 Jerry D. Harris
 Fossil Preparation Lab
 New Mexico Museum of Natural History
 1801 Mountain Rd NW
 Albuquerque NM 87104-1375
 Phone: (505) 899-2809
 Fax: (505) 841-2866
 102354.2222@compuserve.com





From: Joseph Wu <josephwu@ULTRANET.CA>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 09:44:55 -0700
Subject: Re: Folds wanted

At 08:29 99/07/29 +0100, you wrote:
>The short answer is NO, but I am sure some of the more competent designers on
>the list can modify a Dolphin design to match ;o)
>
>If you are not sure what an Ichthyosaur looks like I have found a picture at:
>
>http://www.nationalgeographic.com/media/ngm/9607/0111.html
>
>If anyone does come up with a design (complete with the bug-eyes) I'd love to
>see it :)

Not correct, Andrew! KAWAHATA Fumiaki has an ichthyosaur in his book,
"Dinosaur Origami" (or it might be in "Dinosaur Origami 2"). It doesn't have
bug-eyes, though.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Wu, Origami Artist and Multimedia Producer
t: 604.730.0306 x 105   f: 604.732.7331  e: josephwu@ultranet.ca
w: http://www.origami.vancouver.bc.ca





From: "Jerry D. Harris" <LOKICORP@COMPUSERVE.COM>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 09:51:50 -0400
Subject: Re: Folds wanted

Message text written by Origami List
>If you are not sure what an Ichthyosaur looks like <

        There are fairly good photos of two ichthyosaur skeletons (two very
different morphotypes -- there's more than one kind!) at:

http://tyrrell.magtech.ab.ca/tour/ichthyo.html

There are restorations, of varying quality, at these web sites:

http://web.syr.edu/~dbgoldma/ichthyos.htm

http://ii.fmnh.org/education/Ichthyo.htm

http://www.amnh.org/Exhibition/Fossil_Halls/Timelines/jurassic2.html

http://www.prehistory.com./ichtyosa.htm

 _,_
 ____/_\,) .. _
--____-===( _\/ \\/ \-----_---__
 /\ ' ^__/>/\____\--------
__________/__\_ ____________________________.//__.//_________

 Jerry D. Harris
 Fossil Preparation Lab
 New Mexico Museum of Natural History
 1801 Mountain Rd NW
 Albuquerque NM 87104-1375
 Phone: (505) 899-2809
 Fax: (505) 841-2866
 102354.2222@compuserve.com





From: Doug Philips <dwp@TRANSARC.COM>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 10:07:32 -0400
Subject: Re: [NO] Multilingual Joking.

David Lister indited:

> ....

Wonderful! Wonderful! I shan't quote the entire message, but only those parts
to which I wish add my comments:

> "The seminar will be conducted by Mr Brown and myself". So he ends by using
> the word "myself" incorrectly, when "me" in this context would have been
> perfectly correct. His last state is worse than his first.

Agreed. Though I admit I've never learned when to use 'who' versus 'whom' and
the myself "thing" has me baffled as well. I have managed to learn that a "Joe
and I" or "Joe and me" decision is easy. Remove the "Joe and" to determine
which pronoun would be used, then put the "Joe and" back!

> Whenever we are watching television together, Margaret stoically has to put
> up with a incessant stream of agonosed howls of protest from me as this error
> is constantly perpetrated.

I can sympathise with both of you, though if Margaret were folding something
at the time you howled, and managed to mangle her model, I might be more
sympathetic to her! ;-)

Obigami (Obligatory Origami): Are "Sentence Diagrams" the crease pattern of
language?

-D'gou





From: Doug Philips <dwp@TRANSARC.COM>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 10:14:26 -0400
Subject: Re: Kawasaki Rose

Bruce Stephens, replying to Mark and Theresa's question about Kawasaki's Rose,
indited:

> After that it becomes intrinsically three-dimensional.  The only tip I
> can offer there is to make as many of the subsequent steps as possible
> on each side separately (unfolding them before doing the next), since
> otherwise the whole thing gets sort of cramped, and I find it a bit
> awkward to make the folds cleanly.

I'd like to amplify Bruce's advice to precrease, both for this model, and in
general. For this model, the June '97 issue of NOA magazine has diagrams that
show almost all the precreasing needed. I'm not terribly found of lots of
precreasing (I don't do twisty tessellating Palmer/Shafer models for that very
reason), but for this model there isn't too much, and it really really helps
to form the final shape if on the 3D intermediate steps you have to only do
the collapse instead of both the creasing and the collapsing. This is also a
model that I first learned from another folder, and it does help immensely to
see another model that yours is supposed to emulate!

Good luck!

-D'gou





From: Doug and Anna Weathers <dougw@RDROP.COM>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 10:47:06 -0700
Subject: Re: 2" paper:  folds that work well

Wow!  Shalom's list of miniatures is impressive!

That said, I have found 2" paper surprisingly roomy -- especially when it
is very square (like the Korean paper with multiple patterns sold
inexpensively in plastic boxes).  I like to fold frog-base irises from it.
But then, I fold irises from everything -- it's my standard
test-a-new-paper model.

Anna

Anna Weathers, Portland, Oregon, USA
"In paradox truth."





From: Kimberly Shuck <atsina@HOOKED.NET>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 11:12:13 -0700
Subject: Re: [NO] dogmatism in pronouncing words from other languages in english

italic wrote:
>
> > > Only for uninformed Anglophones. Origami is a Japanese word, and is
> properly
> > > pronounced "oh-ree-gah-mee" with equal stress on all syllables.
> -------------
> What a provincial statement! Perhaps it was made in jest.
> Origami is a transliteration of a Japanese word.
> Its pronunciation therefore follows English spoken language patterns.

I am wondering which Japanese regional accent should we all be adopting, if the
goal is to make everyone pronounce the word properly. I'm afraid that my spoken
Japanese suffers from a pronounced Osaka flavor. But then I often drool, er
drawl, in English as well. I seems a bit difficult, since English is made up of
so very many loan words, to establish what languages these words belong to
anymore. Maybe those languages in which they are in common usage? Dunno, Ahl jus
do mah bess.

Kim





From: Joseph Wu <josephwu@ULTRANET.CA>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 11:14:27 -0700
Subject: Re: [NO] dogmatism in pronouncing words from other languages in english

At 12:54 99/07/29 -0500, JMS wrote:
>> > Only for uninformed Anglophones. Origami is a Japanese word, and is
>properly
>> > pronounced "oh-ree-gah-mee" with equal stress on all syllables.
>-------------
>What a provincial statement!

Naturally. I'm Canadian, after all. 8)

>Perhaps it was made in jest.

Nope.

>Origami is a transliteration of a Japanese word.
>Its pronunciation therefore follows English spoken language patterns.
>A secondary accent is on the first syllable and the primary accent on the
>third.

No, it is not. It is a Romanisation of a Japanese word. There is a
difference between Romanisation and transliteration. If we were
transliterating, we would have come up with something like "ohreegahmee"
because that preserves the original pronunciation better than "origami". But
this is a Romanisation, a rendering of a Japanese word into the Roman
alphabet following a set of rules. What we have are four Japanese phonetic
characters that are Romanised as "o", "ri", "ga", and "mi". They have very
specific correct pronunciations, as I've already stated.

Remember that English is not the only language to use the Roman alphabet.
Just because a word is written in this alphabet does not mean that English
pronunciations automatically apply. Try speaking French using English
pronunciations. It doesn't work. Or how about Polish? I have a Polish friend
whose last name is "Potocki" (Polish spelling). If we transliterate it into
English pronunciation, it would be "Pototski".

>And, like it or not, an acceptable pronunciation for the third syllable
>would be <gam> rhyming with ham.  Grating to my ears, ugly; yes.  But it
>would not be inconsistent with spoken English conventions.  <gahm> rhyming
>with palm is the usual pronunciation by English speaking people (who
>determine the rules for their language and do quite well at it) and is more
>euphonious.

Isn't this more provincial? We take non-English words into English for
whatever reason, even though we may have a perfectly good word for
expressing that particular concept (how about "paper folding"?). Then we
take this acknowledged non-English word and somehow turn it into English,
applying English pronunciations to it. Somewhere along the line we've gone
from an embracing of other cultures ("we like your word and would like to
use it") to a rather provincial view of other cultures ("it's our word now
and we know how to say it better than you").

----------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Wu, Origami Artist and Multimedia Producer
t: 604.730.0306 x 105   f: 604.732.7331  e: josephwu@ultranet.ca
w: http://www.origami.vancouver.bc.ca





From: Kimberly Shuck <atsina@HOOKED.NET>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 12:14:17 -0700
Subject: Re: [NO] dogmatism in pronouncing words from other languages inenglish

> >Origami is a transliteration of a Japanese word.
> >Its pronunciation therefore follows English spoken language patterns.
> >A secondary accent is on the first syllable and the primary accent on the
> >third.
>Joseph Wu wrote:
> No, it is not. It is a Romanisation of a Japanese word. There is a
> difference between Romanisation and transliteration. If we were
> transliterating, we would have come up with something like "ohreegahmee"
> because that preserves the original pronunciation better than "origami". But
> this is a Romanisation, a rendering of a Japanese word into the Roman
> alphabet following a set of rules. What we have are four Japanese phonetic
> characters that are Romanised as "o", "ri", "ga", and "mi". They have very
> specific correct pronunciations, as I've already stated.

Yup, but there are formula regarding the transliteration of Japanese words. And
the accepted transliteration is O ri ga mi. Not the way you spelled it here.
Look up any book on learning Japanese and you will see the chart.

Joseph Wu also wrote
> Isn't this more provincial? We take non-English words into English for
> whatever reason, even though we may have a perfectly good word for
> expressing that particular concept (how about "paper folding"?). Then we
> take this acknowledged non-English word and somehow turn it into English,
> applying English pronunciations to it. Somewhere along the line we've gone
> from an embracing of other cultures ("we like your word and would like to
> use it") to a rather provincial view of other cultures ("it's our word now
> and we know how to say it better than you").

Do you mean English pronunciations or North American pronunciations? Which
English pronunciations and which North American ones? Who exactly are these word
torturing evil-doers? Silly me, I thought that language was intended for
communication, and if the meaning was clear, well... I keep forgetting that for
many it is a tool with which to demonstrate imagined superiority.

Kim





From: Christopher Holt <Ella-mae@EMAIL.MSN.COM>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 12:30:20 -0700
Subject: Re: [NO] dogmatism in pronouncing words from other languages in english

----- Original Message -----
From: Joseph Wu <josephwu@ULTRANET.CA>

> Isn't this more provincial? We take non-English words into English for
> whatever reason, even though we may have a perfectly good word for
> expressing that particular concept (how about "paper folding"?). Then we
> take this acknowledged non-English word and somehow turn it into English,
> applying English pronunciations to it. Somewhere along the line we've gone
> from an embracing of other cultures ("we like your word and would like to
> use it") to a rather provincial view of other cultures ("it's our word now
> and we know how to say it better than you").
>
Would it be right and proper for me to chastize almost everyone in the state
of Texas for taking liberties with our own national language (that'd be
English, I assume)? Or a Bostonian? I've tried to divorce myself of any
remnant of accent, as I agree with your point about respecting intended
pronunciations, and try to do so with imported words as well; however that
is just for my own personal sense of balance. If we can't all agree on how
our native (relatively native, for non-native Americans) language is to be
spoken, what point is there in trying to dictate how words coopted into our
language shall be pronounced? If using the word 'origami' in a sentence is
to be construed as speaking Japanese, there could be some argument. On the
flip side, the first time I heard a southerner speak French I darned near
laughed my derriere off, but didn't feel I could tell him to pay respect to
the language. Non-native speakers often attempt English with poor results--I
hope no one will argue that they should be laughed at for missed attempts,
even if they are chronic. I'm starting to feel guilty that this thread has
spun off of a bad joke that I posted on another thread some days ago. All
the best - c!!!





From: Jorma Oksanen <tenu@SCI.FI>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 12:34:34 +0200
Subject: Treemaker on PC (was Re: Robert Lang)

On 27-Jul-99, Ariel (ariel@DATAPHONE.SE) wrote:

>>It's a pitty, this program can be downloaded for free, but it is for
>>Macintosh only.  I wonder if there will be one available for my PC
>>one nice day, too.

>There is a company called ARDI developing a Mac emulator for PC.  I
>contacted them about Treemaker, and actually I got them to contact
>Robert Lang.  Treemaker doesn't run yet on their emulator, but they
>are confident that it will in some near future.  Their main developer
>is a folder as well, so he was quite enthusiastic aobut getting
>Treemaker to run on PC.

Anyone trying to run Treemaker on PC:  get an Amiga emulator and try
either ShapeShifter (freeware) or Fusion (commercial).  This may sound
weird, but there has been much more interest in emulating Amiga on PC
than on Mac emulation so Amiga emulation might be more complete.  The
Mac emulation on Amiga is nearly as fast as a real Mac, even faster
sometimes, so there's no speed penalty for doing the two-step
emulation.

--
Jorma "who am I today?" Oksanen   tenu@sci.fi

Weyland-Yutani - Building Better Worlds





From: Jorma Oksanen <tenu@SCI.FI>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 12:34:59 +0200
Subject: Re: 2" paper:  folds that work well (and instruction trivia)

On 27-Jul-99, Kyle Barger (kbarger@NAVPOINT.COM) wrote:
>I recently bought a pack of 2" paper as an impulse purchase.  I've
>never worked with anything smaller than 4" paper and I'm wondering
>what are good folds to try with paper this size.

It's not too small, so try whatever model you're familiar with.  My
favorites include Neale's dragon, Kawasaki's rose from OftC, Engel's
Valentine, Montroll's dimetrodon, Yoshizawa's mouse and Kasahara's
angel.  All of them are (easily) foldable from 2" paper.

Modular pieces are fine too, but for Sonobe modules I would cut the
paper into 1" squares just to increase the 'wow' factor.  I used 4cm
(1.6") paper for Tom Hull's Five Intersecting tetrahedra.  2" paper is
also nice for Dave Mitchell's Electra.

Minimally yours,
--
Jorma Oksanen   tenu@sci.fi

Weyland-Yutani - Building Better Worlds





From: Dorothy Engleman <FoldingCA@WEBTV.NET>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 12:37:31 -0700
Subject: Re: Member News for The Paper

Welcome, Debra to the Paper.  We all look forward to your enterprising
new 6 issues per year schedule.

But a two day deadline notice for the submission of membership news?

Dorothy





From: italic <italic@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 12:54:35 -0500
Subject: dogmatism in pronouncing words from other languages in english

> > Only for uninformed Anglophones. Origami is a Japanese word, and is
properly
> > pronounced "oh-ree-gah-mee" with equal stress on all syllables.
-------------
What a provincial statement! Perhaps it was made in jest.
Origami is a transliteration of a Japanese word.
Its pronunciation therefore follows English spoken language patterns.
A secondary accent is on the first syllable and the primary accent on the
third.
And, like it or not, an acceptable pronunciation for the third syllable
would be <gam> rhyming with ham.  Grating to my ears, ugly; yes.  But it
would not be inconsistent with spoken English conventions.  <gahm> rhyming
with palm is the usual pronunciation by English speaking people (who
determine the rules for their language and do quite well at it) and is more
euphonious.
JMS





From: Debra Nelson <debnels@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 14:10:55 -0400
Subject: Member News for The Paper

I'm the new editor of The Paper and am looking for member news for the
next issue. The deadline is Aug. 1. Please send any pertinent info to me
via this email address.
Thanks!
Debra Nelson-Hogan





From: Scott Cramer <scram@LANDMARKNET.NET>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 14:16:29 -0400
Subject: Re: [NO] dogmatism in pronouncing words from other languages in english

You say Car-mee-na
I say Carm-eye-na...
Let's call the whole thing Orff.

>italic wrote:
>>
>> > > Only for uninformed Anglophones. Origami is a Japanese word, and is
>> properly
>> > > pronounced "oh-ree-gah-mee" with equal stress on all syllables.
>> -------------
>> What a provincial statement! Perhaps it was made in jest.
>> Origami is a transliteration of a Japanese word.
>> Its pronunciation therefore follows English spoken language patterns.





From: "Jerry D. Harris" <LOKICORP@COMPUSERVE.COM>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 14:16:44 -0400
Subject: Pop-eyed Ichthyosaurs?!?

Hi All -

        What is the basis for ichthyosaurs being pop-eyed?!?

                _,_
           ____/_\,)                    ..  _
--____-===(  _\/                         \\/ \-----_---__
           /\  '                        ^__/>/\____\--------
__________/__\_ ____________________________.//__.//_________

                     Jerry D. Harris
                 Fossil Preparation Lab
          New Mexico Museum of Natural History
                   1801 Mountain Rd NW
               Albuquerque  NM  87104-1375
                 Phone:  (505) 841-2809
                  Fax:  (505) 841-2866
               102354.2222@compuserve.com





From: Scott Cramer <scram@LANDMARKNET.NET>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 15:30:32 -0400
Subject: Re: [NO] dogmatism in pronouncing words from other languages inenglish

>I thought that language was intended for
communication, and if the meaning was clear, well... I keep forgetting that
for
many it is a tool with which to demonstrate imagined superiority.<

Amen.

(do you pronounce that ah-men or ay-men?)

Scott





From: Mark and Theresa <mark@HOBBITON.FORCE9.NET>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 18:25:56 +0100
Subject: Re: post-its

> I've heard of models for Post-its.  Does anyone know where one can get
> diagrams?
>

The recentest (!) British Origami Magazine has a butterfly made from the
non-square post-its wjith the ability to stick it after folding.
You know the next bit...

Join the BOS for details! (Nick will give you the info for the website,
won't you Nick?)
--
Mark





From: Mark and Theresa <mark@HOBBITON.FORCE9.NET>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 18:26:51 +0100
Subject: Re: Skydiver model

> Does anyone know where I might find a model of a skydiver in the standard
> freefall "arch" position?  Or perhaps a two part model of a skydiver
> hanging under a parachute (though this one would have to have a stand)?
>

The last British Origami Society con. had "frogman" type diver...this
could probably be adapted fairly easily...though not by me!

--
Mark





From: Perry Bailey <pbailey@OPENCOMINC.COM>
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 03:59:06 -0500
Subject: Re: New threads-->Mette Rings

david whitbeck wrote:

> ps note that this is only addressed to the flaming dragons, a few of the
> replies have been calm and intelligent.
> pps now that's a funny thought flaming dragons folding origami with their
     claws!

You know it's a funny thing but I spent three weeks once wo5rking
on a model of flaming dragon! day after day a little fold here a
twist there here a sink and there spread squash.  When I was
finaly finished it was a beautiful thing to see.  Unfortunately I
can't share it with any one, it was just too well folded, right
aft the final fold was made it came to life reared back and blew
out a beautiful flame... yep thats right, it blew out and honest
to goodness flame, incerated itself and all the diagrams for
making it too!!!

Perry (laugh a little life is too short)
--
pbailey@opencominc.com
http://www.afgsoft.com/perry/  <---- Origami Web Page with
Diagrams!
ICQ 23622644





From: Paul & Jan Fodor <origami@ALOHA.NET>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 09:51:18 -1000
Subject: crane wreath

I just learned to fold the crane wreath recently taught at the OUSA
convention...does anyone know the creator and his/her email or snail
mail address?

Thanks in advance, Aloha, Jan





From: Sandra P Hoffman <ghidra@CONSCOOP.OTTAWA.ON.CA>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 12:23:42 -0400
Subject: Re: [NO] dogmatism in pronouncing words from other languages in english

On Thu, 29 Jul 1999, Joseph Wu wrote:
>
> It's a different story for new words imported from another language. There's
> an external reference to how the word is pronounced. If, given that
> reference, a person is still unable to say it properly, fine. If, however,
> they just can't be bothered, then there is an attitude of colonialism and
> "imagined superiority" at work.

No there isn't. That is how language works. It is a mostly unconscious
and unstoppable process. Many words have been brought
into English and over time the original pronunciations have gradually
conformed to something that sounds more English. Most of the words I'm
thinking of are Ancient Latin and French. There was an external
reference in the presence of conquering native language speakers but
the pronunciations still changed over time. The same has happened by one
means or another in every other language in the world. Words have
come in by invitation or conquest and gradually evolved to have more
native pronunciations. There is no disrespect in this process,
it is just what happens. Origami has existed as a word used in English for
long enough that it is undergoing this process.

sph

Sandra P. Hoffman ghidra@conscoop.ottawa.on.ca
http://www.flora.org/sandra/
----------------------------
The one small garden of a free gardener was all his need and due,
not a garden swollen to a realm;
his own hands to use,
not the hands of others to command. --Sam Gamgee





From: Joseph Wu <josephwu@ULTRANET.CA>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 12:32:55 -0700
Subject: Re: [NO] dogmatism in pronouncing words from other languages inenglish

At 12:14 99/07/29 -0700, Kimberly Shuck wrote:
>Yup, but there are formula regarding the transliteration of Japanese words.
>And the accepted transliteration is O ri ga mi. Not the way you spelled it
>here. Look up any book on learning Japanese and you will see the chart.

No, read what I said again more carefully. That's the ROMANISATION, not the
TRANSLITERATION. The charts you refer to should give the official
pronunciation for the Romanised syllables. If you want to transliterate, you
need to render it into English phonemes that most closely match the sounds
of the Japanese original.

>Do you mean English pronunciations or North American pronunciations? Which
>English pronunciations and which North American ones? Who exactly are these
>word torturing evil-doers? Silly me, I thought that language was intended for
>communication, and if the meaning was clear, well... I keep forgetting that
>for many it is a tool with which to demonstrate imagined superiority.

Silly me, I thought that was exactly what I was complaining about. If we
must borrow words from other languages, let's make an effort to understand
where the word came from and how it is used instead of being so colonial
about it. Despite the fact that English so easily incorporates non-English
words, Anglophones should beware asserting linguistic superiority by
butchering these borrowed words.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Wu, Origami Artist and Multimedia Producer
t: 604.730.0306 x 105   f: 604.732.7331  e: josephwu@ultranet.ca
w: http://www.origami.vancouver.bc.ca





From: Sandra P Hoffman <ghidra@CONSCOOP.OTTAWA.ON.CA>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 12:40:22 -0400
Subject: Re: New threads

On Thu, 29 Jul 1999, Scott Cramer wrote:

> all the best!!-c wrote:
>
> >'m starting to feel guilty that this thread has
> >spun off of a bad joke that I posted on another thread some days ago.
>
>
> I'm going to start quoting entire messages and sending them in MIME format
> if we all can't move on soon. Anyone out there FOLD anything today?

No, but I butchered the mouse from Montroll's North American Animals in
Origami yesterday. (Being a vegetarian, I only butcher paper animals.) I
did something wrong, I don't know what, right near
the start. It still came out looking sufficiently mouselike that the rest
of the family couldn't see what I was annoyed about. I'm not sure I'll try
it again to see if I can get it right. I don't think I like it enough for
that.

I'm working through some books systematically to try and improve my
technique. I also start dreaming folding sequences if I fold frequently
enough. I like those dreams. Anyway to improve the technique and create
the conditions for origami dreams, I'm folding quite a few models I don't
feel particularly attracted to. The mouse was one.

sph

Sandra P. Hoffman ghidra@conscoop.ottawa.on.ca
http://www.flora.org/sandra/
----------------------------
The one small garden of a free gardener was all his need and due,
not a garden swollen to a realm;
his own hands to use,
not the hands of others to command. --Sam Gamgee





From: Dorothy Engleman <FoldingCA@WEBTV.NET>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 12:45:32 -0700
Subject: Re: [NO] dogmatism in pronouncing words from other languages inenglish

Scott inquired:

"Do you pronounce that ah-men or ay-men?"

It's pronouced ah-women....

Hey, am I in the women and origami thread?

Dorothy





From: Joseph Wu <josephwu@ULTRANET.CA>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 12:49:37 -0700
Subject: Re: [NO] dogmatism in pronouncing words from other languages in english

At 12:30 99/07/29 -0700, Christopher Holt wrote:
>Would it be right and proper for me to chastize almost everyone in the state
>of Texas for taking liberties with our own national language (that'd be
>English, I assume)? Or a Bostonian?

As far as I know, the USA does not have an official national language.
Perhaps an American could verify (or refute) that.

>I've tried to divorce myself of any
>remnant of accent, as I agree with your point about respecting intended
>pronunciations, and try to do so with imported words as well; however that
>is just for my own personal sense of balance. If we can't all agree on how
>our native (relatively native, for non-native Americans) language is to be
>spoken, what point is there in trying to dictate how words coopted into our
>language shall be pronounced? If using the word 'origami' in a sentence is
>to be construed as speaking Japanese, there could be some argument. On the
>flip side, the first time I heard a southerner speak French I darned near
>laughed my derriere off, but didn't feel I could tell him to pay respect to
>the language. Non-native speakers often attempt English with poor results--I
>hope no one will argue that they should be laughed at for missed attempts,
>even if they are chronic. I'm starting to feel guilty that this thread has
>spun off of a bad joke that I posted on another thread some days ago. All
>the best - c!!!

Don't feel guilty, I'm having fun despite being called arrogant and being
accused of "imagined superiority". Besides, this thread would never have
started if I hadn't responded to your joke (and if others hadn't responded
to my response, etc.).

Anyway, to answer your point, there's a difference between inability to say
something and the closed-mindedness that says "this is my word now, so I'll
say it any way I please." My parents both speak English with a Hong Kong
accent (which is an interesting mix between a Cantonese accent and a British
accent). And my dad, for the life of him, will never be able to say the word
"blink". It comes out as "splink" for some strange unknown reason. There's
nothing wrong with that; he just can't get his mouth (or his mind) around
that word. The same goes for regional and national dialects of any language.
We get used to speaking a certain way and it sticks.

It's a different story for new words imported from another language. There's
an external reference to how the word is pronounced. If, given that
reference, a person is still unable to say it properly, fine. If, however,
they just can't be bothered, then there is an attitude of colonialism and
"imagined superiority" at work.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Wu, Origami Artist and Multimedia Producer
t: 604.730.0306 x 105   f: 604.732.7331  e: josephwu@ultranet.ca
w: http://www.origami.vancouver.bc.ca





From: Christopher Holt <Ella-mae@EMAIL.MSN.COM>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 12:56:03 -0700
Subject: Re: [NO] dogmatism in pronouncing words from other languages inenglish

----- Original Message -----
From: Dorothy Engleman <FoldingCA@WEBTV.NET>

> Scott inquired:
>
> "Do you pronounce that ah-men or ay-men?"
>
> It's pronouced ah-women....
>
> Hey, am I in the women and origami thread?
>
> Dorothy

Unfortunately not, but I'd love to be in that thread again--this one is
starting to make my brain hurt!!!!! It's about (Joseph--is that a-'bout', or
a-'boot' up there in beautiful BC?) time some one scream "Jane!! Stop this
crazy thing!!" ala George Jetson. Let's all try not to hurt each other. All
the best - c!!!





From: Joseph Wu <josephwu@ULTRANET.CA>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 13:00:25 -0700
Subject: Re: [NO] dogmatism in pronouncing words from other languages inenglish

At 12:56 99/07/29 -0700, you wrote:
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Dorothy Engleman <FoldingCA@WEBTV.NET>
>
>> Scott inquired:
>>
>> "Do you pronounce that ah-men or ay-men?"
>>
>> It's pronouced ah-women....
>>
>> Hey, am I in the women and origami thread?
>>
>> Dorothy
>
>Unfortunately not, but I'd love to be in that thread again--this one is
>starting to make my brain hurt!!!!! It's about (Joseph--is that a-'bout', or
>a-'boot' up there in beautiful BC?) time some one scream "Jane!! Stop this
>crazy thing!!" ala George Jetson. Let's all try not to hurt each other. All
>the best - c!!!

That's an interesting one. I say "about" to rhyme with "out". But some
Americans claim that I'm saying "aboot". Of course, I hear some of them
saying "abaaaut" (or something like that).

----------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Wu, Origami Artist and Multimedia Producer
t: 604.730.0306 x 105   f: 604.732.7331  e: josephwu@ultranet.ca
w: http://www.origami.vancouver.bc.ca





From: Joseph Wu <josephwu@ULTRANET.CA>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 13:33:58 -0700
Subject: Re: New threads

At 22:33 99/07/29 +0200, Matthias wrote:
>Stop the pissing contest, the origami's getting wet.

Apologies. Too much coffee today. 8)

At 16:21 99/07/29 -0400, Scott wrote:
>I'm going to start quoting entire messages and sending them in MIME format
>if we all can't move on soon. Anyone out there FOLD anything today?

I've got a new lily (day lily, tiger lily) folded from an equilateral
triangle, and I've been playing with pleating patterns for lampshades. Does
that count?

----------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Wu, Origami Artist and Multimedia Producer
t: 604.730.0306 x 105   f: 604.732.7331  e: josephwu@ultranet.ca
w: http://www.origami.vancouver.bc.ca





From: Howard Portugal <howardpo@MICROSOFT.COM>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 13:46:07 -0700
Subject: Folding

I've been slowly folding a set of Mette's 18 unit rings out of 1 1/2" paper
and linking them together. I'm not sure how many I'll make ...

Howard Portugal
Critical Problem Resolution - NT Escalation (CPR/NT)

* howardpo@microsoft.com
*Wk: 425/704-4078
*Pgr: Urgent V-Mail

One is always a long way from solving a problem until one actually has the
answer.

Stephen Hawking





From: david whitbeck <dmwhitbeck@UCDAVIS.EDU>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 13:48:37 -0700
Subject: Re: Pop-eyed Ichthyosaurs?!?

Duh!  Too much coffee!

David

>Hi All -
>
>        What is the basis for ichthyosaurs being pop-eyed?!?
>
>
>                _,_
>           ____/_\,)                    ..  _
>--____-===(  _\/                         \\/ \-----_---__
>           /\  '                        ^__/>/\____\--------
>__________/__\_ ____________________________.//__.//_________
>
>                     Jerry D. Harris
>                 Fossil Preparation Lab
>          New Mexico Museum of Natural History
>                   1801 Mountain Rd NW
>               Albuquerque  NM  87104-1375
>                 Phone:  (505) 841-2809
>                  Fax:  (505) 841-2866
>               102354.2222@compuserve.com





From: Kimberly Shuck <atsina@HOOKED.NET>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 13:50:18 -0700
Subject: Re: New threads

Scott Cramer wrote:
> I'm going to start quoting entire messages and sending them in MIME format
> if we all can't move on soon. Anyone out there FOLD anything today?
>
> Scott scram@landmarknet.net

Working on top hats as per a list request about a week ago.
Kim





From: david whitbeck <dmwhitbeck@UCDAVIS.EDU>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 14:03:56 -0700
Subject: Re: New threads-->Mette Rings

I am folding the Mette ring that's up on her site for free!  It rocks!  How
did she think of such a simple unit that makes such a neat ring!  All who
haven't folded it need to stop whatever they're doing and fold it now!  I'm
using alternating red and yellow kami for it.  Yippee!!  I hope that won't
be mispronounced because then my entire cultural identity would be under
attack!

Okay, so that was a bit heavy with the sarcasm.  As I read these threads on
pronounciation and dogmatism as it goes along y'all start to sound bestial
in your arguments.  I just imagine dragons at the computers breathing
flames at the monitors.  Just take a deep breath, pick up a piece of paper
and fold it until the rage goes away.  Don't submit to the darkside of the
force.

David
ps note that this is only addressed to the flaming dragons, a few of the
replies have been calm and intelligent.
pps now that's a funny thought flaming dragons folding origami with their claws!

ppps to Howard Portugal: I can't believe we're doing the same fold at the
same time and emailing about it at the same time.  Weird!





From: Howard Portugal <howardpo@MICROSOFT.COM>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 14:07:10 -0700
Subject: Re: New threads-->Mette Rings

> ppps to Howard Portugal: I can't believe we're doing the same
> fold at the
> same time and emailing about it at the same time.  Weird!
>
Ok David, are you folding it RIGHT NOW, wait, I'll make a crease... ok, now
for the next one ...

;-)

Howard





From: Christopher Holt <Ella-mae@EMAIL.MSN.COM>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 14:45:37 -0700
Subject: Re: New threads

----- Original Message -----
From: Sandra P Hoffman <ghidra@CONSCOOP.OTTAWA.ON.CA>

>(Being a vegetarian, I only butcher paper animals.)
>
I Fold out of butcher paper (sometimes), so I feel it's just destiny
fulfilled when one of those gets butchered. It's fun stuff, and you can get
fairly wide rolls of it.

> I also start dreaming folding sequences if I fold frequently
> enough. I like those dreams>

How about folding dream sequences? Create models in your sleep. Origami
inspiration on tape, that you listen to while unconscious. I think we'd have
a market for that. All the best - c!!
