English Language Learners

Anonymous

00:00

@DamkerngT. I think in languages with a shallow orthography, it's less necessary to distinguish vowel (writing) from vowel (speech), because the vowel letters represent vowel sounds. And the same for consonants of course. But English has instead a deep orthography . . .

Anonymous

Nonetheless, we're aware that there's some sort of relationship between the two.

Anonymous

And I think we English speakers often conflate the two...

Damkerng T.

03:02

4

Q: Why should sentences not start with "there is" or "there are"?

I had written a paper with the sentence "There is also social proof in how the man with the pizza ends up with an attractive women". I had lost marks due to the fact it is poor English to start sentences with "There is" or "There are". I want to double check this is true because the prof actually...

grammar

The question (and also the rule in the question) is interesting.

Anonymous

03:24

To me, "poor English" sounds like a matter of opinion.

Anonymous

"I don't like such-and-such"

Anonymous

More objectively I think something can be called "ungrammatical" or "nonstandard", and then we could point to evidence and say "Nope! There's no reason to consider this construction either of those things"

Anonymous

But they didn't say either of those things

Anonymous

Perhaps they could say "poor style", and then an appeal could be made to style guides (which are, in part, books of opinion)

Anonymous

But if someone says something is "poor English", the defenses I can come up with are:

Anonymous

03:29

"No it isn't! I like it. So there."

Anonymous

and

Anonymous

"Good writers do the same thing. Here are some examples: . . ."

Damkerng T.

It also provides me evidence that is related to one of my curiousities.

"Is it possible to be highly competent without being fluent?"

I always tend to believe that it should be related, and perhaps fluency is required for high competency. But the teacher in the question is an evidence to counter that.

Anonymous

03:47

@DamkerngT. What, "competent" in the Chomskyan sense?

Anonymous

I don't think "fluency" is well-defined

Damkerng T.

I'm not sure, I use the two terms loosely.

Anonymous

That's okay, most people do, I think.

Anonymous

But you might need to define your terms more precisely to answer a question like "Is it possible to be highly competent without being fluent?"

Damkerng T.

But let's say that someone who can't speak (or even type in a chat) the language, and yet can correct complicated essays or papers.

Anonymous

03:50

Well, you could certainly apply mechanical rules to language that you yourself have not internalized.

Damkerng T.

I wouldn't, or even if I did, I wouldn't be so sure.

But perhaps ESL teachers can be very good at this.

Anonymous

You could teach someone a rule (let's say a fake rule like "don't end sentences with prepositions") even if they didn't know English, as long as you could teach them to identify prepositions

Anonymous

And then that person would be capable of using a red pen when they catch someone violating the rule

Damkerng T.

nods

Anonymous

That's what I mean by "apply mechanical rules"

Damkerng T.

03:53

But that doesn't make the result of the corrections (after rules applied) something really good, I think.

Anonymous

Well, I was using an extreme example to show that it's not necessarily a good thing

Anonymous

On the other hand, awareness of rules you haven't internalized yet can be the first step to actually internalizing them :-)

Damkerng T.

Sometimes I found papers which sounds really unnatural, and yet I couldn't find grammar flaws in it. And I thought to myself, it might be because I'm not good enough to see them.

Anonymous

There's a lot of stuff to language besides just grammar, too

Damkerng T.

It seems to me that most of the tests (for language learners) focus on grammar, vocabulary, and some narrow usages.

So maybe, to learners, other aspects of the language might not be as important.

Anonymous

03:56

Bad sentence → You might say if you wanted to that a person is capable in theory of putting together a sentence or sentences in a fashion which though possibly grammatical is not particularly or especially good from the point of view of naturalness or from other perspectives such as comprehensibility and may not communicate as clearly as that person mentioned earlier in this sentence probably desired.

Anonymous

Hey, it's hard putting together bad sentences on purpose.

Anonymous

I'll have to stick to doing it on accident :-)

Damkerng T.

I'm sure we can do it! :-)

By definition, I think doing something bad is easier than doing something good. :-)

Anonymous

Hey, I tried!

Anonymous

I was trying to keep it grammatical but make it bad in other ways.

Damkerng T.

03:58

Not particularly bad, but surely difficult to read.

Anonymous

Oh, but in my book "difficult to read" is a bad thing.

Anonymous

You only want "difficult to read" when it's necessary, I think.

Anonymous

Or in other words, make it as difficult as you need to, but no difficulter. :-)

Damkerng T.

Some people seem to like to do that on purpose.

Anonymous

People do like to make things difficult to read.

Damkerng T.

03:59

I think Newton also did that too!

Anonymous

There are a great many reasons why you might!

Anonymous

For example, you might try to impress people with your grandiloquence.

Damkerng T.

Which might work for some people.

Anonymous

Or perhaps you might speak in an overly formal tone to distance yourself from someone--

Damkerng T.

But imo, it works oppositely.

Anonymous

04:00

Yeah, it does. I think that especially kids get the idea into their heads that using as many big words as possible makes them look smarter.

Anonymous

Besides that, some people think those so-called "big words" are fun.

Anonymous

When I was young, I learned an awful lot of vocabulary from books, and I got picked on for using "big words" all the time. I didn't know any better. :-)

Damkerng T.

Oh, that reminds me of someone who was about to have an interview who visited our chat room last year.

I already forgot that user's name.

Anonymous

Me too.

Damkerng T.

But I remember the first thing they asked was vocabulary.

Anonymous

04:02

And even an adult, someone who's not necessarily trying to impress, might use a twenty-dollar word here or there just because they're having fun with the language.

Damkerng T.

How can I learn lots of words, fast? Something like that.

Anonymous

And who's to say they shouldn't try to have fun with English, or any other language?

Anonymous

Certainly I try to have fun with language :-)

Damkerng T.

@snailboat I think here and there is okay.

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. Right, and it also probably depends on who you're talking to.

Anonymous

04:03

And what your goal is in communicating.

Damkerng T.

But when it's too much or it doesn't fit the speaker, it's rather an awful idea to speak or write like that.

That, too! (who we're talking to)

Anonymous

I've noticed that some people associate these "big words" with formality, and different people switch to formal registers in different situations. Some people, for example, start speaking or writing more formally when they're angry at someone

Anonymous

They use language that distances them from their opponents.

Anonymous

Or, when they're trying to win an argument--maybe they aren't angry, but they associate formality with a style of debating they're used to using.

Damkerng T.

Oh, I think I've seen someone started to write really, really great immediately instantly once they felt being insult.

That, too!

Anonymous

04:06

Or perhaps using big words gives them a sense of superiority over their opponents. I don't know.

Anonymous

I can't read minds, so I can only make guesses at the reasoning behind the behavior I've observed.

Damkerng T.

I'm not sure about women, but I've seen that very often in men.

I think women have much neater way to convey their messages. :-)

Anonymous

Hehe. I hesitate to make generalizations, but I think testosterone is probably in part responsible for certain styles of conflict.

Damkerng T.

Probably. :D

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. I remember that.

Anonymous

04:09

I think when people cram lots of words, they're sort of setting the stage for actually learning them at a later date.

Damkerng T.

Don't know how well the guy did in the interview.

Anonymous

You make an entry for it in your mental dictionary, and you can keep that entry if you review enough later on

Anonymous

But cramming vocabulary from flashcards and so on won't really let you use that vocabulary effectively

Damkerng T.

That might be possible. I also think that it's equally possible that they'll just forget almost all the words they cram.

Anonymous

You need to get a sense for each word and how it's used--not necessarily how it can be used, what its limits are, but what range of usage is most natural for it

Anonymous

04:11

@DamkerngT. Well, yes. That happens any time you cram and don't review.

Anonymous

You can forget just about anything if you never review it.

Damkerng T.

Ah, Flashcard is a great tool for that.

Agree. I think the review part is the key.

Anonymous

Well, I don't mean to oversimplify . . .

Anonymous

The fact is, you can learn something once and remember it forever.

Anonymous

And you can learn something once, forget it almost immediately, and need to re-learn it any number of times before you really get it.

Damkerng T.

04:13

If it's really important or it comes with enough impact, I think.

Anonymous

When we use a language every day, we naturally "review" the most common bits all the time

Damkerng T.

I think I have many movie scenes that I don't need to see or hear it the second time in order to remember the scene.

Anonymous

So you might never intentionally review English vocabulary, but if you keep using the language, it counts, and it's spaced out :-)

Damkerng T.

That same goes to things in real-life.

Anonymous

In my experience, I remember maybe 95% of the vocabulary I learn with no special effort

Anonymous

04:14

The remaining 5% seems to take a lot of effort.

Damkerng T.

@snailboat That's the way I like!

Just use it, and before I know it, I can remember it!

Anonymous

I have a bunch of knowledge I'm fairly certain I've never used, and yet haven't forgotten. But that's more or less by chance :-)

Damkerng T.

The concept of passive vs. active vocab sets is also interesting.

Anonymous

Uh-huh

Damkerng T.

I also think it's true too!

Remember the word crud we talked about earlier today?

Anonymous

04:16

I'm not sure active-passive is entirely binary, but

Anonymous

I don't remember, no. I remember saying "crud" :-)

Damkerng T.

I know it, but I don't know it well enough to use it, I just said "stick".

Anonymous

I don't see the discussion of crud in the chat logs.

Damkerng T.

Oh, it's not crud, see?

Anonymous

Crud!

Damkerng T.

04:17

็Hmm... what is it? looking up the log...

Anonymous

"Crud!" is a minced oath, like "Holy crow!"

Damkerng T.

Oh, it's crutch, see? Hehe. :D

Anonymous

Ah, crutch!

Damkerng T.

It's not something I used before, so I don't really remember it.

And I'm sure I found it in A Farewell to Arms, I still can't remember it.

But when you used it, I knew what exactly it was, instantly.

Anonymous

The Japanese word for crutch is matsuba-zue. Matsuba is "pine needle", and tsue is "staff" (like a walking stick or cane).

Anonymous

04:19

I always thought that word was neat.

Damkerng T.

Pine needle?

I still can't relate it to crutch.

BRB in about 3 min.

Anonymous

Anonymous

Maybe if you turn the first picture upside down mentally you can see the resemblance :-)

Damkerng T.

Ah, I see. It's about the shape!

Anonymous

04:25

Yep! :-)

Anonymous

0

Q: Verbs corresponding to 'showed' for other senses

Consider the sentence: The teacher showed the students what an elephant looks like. (This sentence is perhaps more naturally written as 'The teacher showed the students an elephant.' but I need to phrase it this way to explain my question.) What would be the corresponding verbs for other s...

word-request

Anonymous

> The teacher showed the students what an elephant looks like.
> The teacher showed the students what an elephant smells like.
> The teacher showed the students what an elephant sounds like.
> The teacher showed the students what an elephant feels like.
> The teacher showed the students what an elephant tastes like.

Damkerng T.

If he changed the sentence to The teacher ______ the students how the Earth revolves around the sun, it could be much more fun. :D

Anonymous

I'm not sure all of those sentences are equally good, but I think maybe show can be used with other senses besides sight

Anonymous

On that "there is/are is poor English" thing, . . .

Damkerng T.

04:28

Oh, he looked for the verb in there, not the tense.

Anonymous

I think it's a failure to understand information structure

Damkerng T.

Yes?

Where is that question? Looking...

Anonymous

Sometimes we use words that are not strictly necessary to convey an idea because it brings a certain constituent into focus or identifies it as new information

Damkerng T.

Got it.

Frankly, when I read the OP's sentence the first time, I think it's similar to what I usually read in academic papers.

Anonymous

Poorly written academic papers...?

Damkerng T.

04:32

I was wondering about the article usages, but out of context, I had no idea. (It might be more interesting to see the sentences before and after.)

@snailboat Perhaps I reviewed too many papers. :-)

And theses.

Anonymous

Um, there are certainly poorly written academic papers out there . . . :-)

Damkerng T.

I'm sure that many of them can be said "poorly written".

Anonymous

But I'm not sure if I've read one that contains a sentence quite like that.

Anonymous

> EDIT: I personally don't see the need to quote the exact sentence as it is just an example, but I see some are getting quite worked up over the entire sentence in general.

Damkerng T.

I mean the construction, not the exact phrase.

Anonymous

04:34

I don't understand what makes that question off-topic.

Damkerng T.

@snailboat Oh, I think the entire sentence (and the sentences before and after) is everything.

"because it is about a non-existent rule"?

Anonymous

That doesn't make sense to me.

Anonymous

When you're given a "non-existent rule", isn't it important to discuss it so you can learn how the language actually works?

Damkerng T.

I'm not sure about the exact rules for off-topic there.

Anonymous

Me either. I never figured it out.

Anonymous

04:36

That's one reason I haven't participated more over there.

Anonymous

"Is it true that English works like this?" "No, it works like this."

Damkerng T.

Really, to me, that question should be on ELL.

Anonymous

Question asked, question answered

Anonymous

"Is it true that English works like this?" "Pfft. Why would you even ask that? Let's get this question off the site"

Damkerng T.

Though it might be a bit advanced, obviously, it's about someone learning to use English properly.

@snailboat I felt that sometimes too, over there.

Anonymous

04:38

I've only asked two questions on ELU, myself

Anonymous

Happily, both remained open :-)

Damkerng T.

But it seems like it's a consensus.

Anonymous

I did answer several questions that got closed.

Damkerng T.

I got a few of mine closed. :-)

Anonymous

It frustrated me each time, because they seemed like reasonable questions, and when I answer a question that's closed I feel like I'm being told I'm part of the problem rather than part of the solution

Anonymous

04:40

Like I'm working against the community consensus, which isn't something I want to do

Anonymous

(There are some people who, inexplicably, vote to close and answer questions.)

Damkerng T.

I think luck got involved very often.

Anonymous

Honestly, question closing on ELU seems to me like "I don't like this question" more than anything else.

Anonymous

Sometimes I agree, too. I don't like every question.

Damkerng T.

:-)

Anonymous

04:42

I guess some people feel the close reasons are round holes and the questions they dislike are square pegs.

Anonymous

I know certain users have said they just pick whichever close reason seems closest but don't worry too much about the actual reason--they just want them off the site

Anonymous

It seems broken to me . . .

Damkerng T.

I also observe that many questions should be moved to ELL. ELU users often complain that. And yet sometimes they answered such questions happily enough.

Anonymous

I have noticed that ELU gets quite a bit more answers than ELL.

Damkerng T.

@snailboat Partly because ELU has too many questions a day, I think.

Anonymous

04:44

Accordingly, they get more bad answers than ELL.

Anonymous

But they also get more good answers.

Damkerng T.

And it seems like most OPs prefer that.

Anonymous

Sometimes I think certain types of questions need to be asked at ELU because the expertise here at ELL is lacking--and I don't mean to say we don't have any expert users, of course we have users like StoneyB here

Anonymous

But certain knowledgeable users seem to only hang out at ELU

Damkerng T.

Unfortunately, I think it's true.

Anonymous

04:46

That question about lest still doesn't have a satisfactory answer, I think.

Damkerng T.

I think JMB's answer is good enough.

Is it him?

Anonymous

Well, maybe it is. I need to go find it and look again.

Damkerng T.

Oh, it's BobRodes.

0

A: Is my understanding of this quote right?

It's a little easier to understand if you add context (this is from Thoreau's Walden, chapter 18, paragraph 6): I am convinced that I cannot exaggerate enough even to lay the foundation of a true expression. Who that has heard a strain of music feared then lest he should speak extravagantly a...

It's got one downvote; no explanation.

Anonymous

0

Q: What is this "any"?

Who that has heard a strain of music feared then lest he should speak extravagantly any more forever? (Source: Thoreau's Walden, Ch. 18, Para. 6) I don't understand why "any more" is used here. There is no negative here.

grammar

Anonymous

That's the question I meant

Anonymous

04:49

That was the one I helped get migrated to ELU :-) But the author didn't want it there, so it came back.

Damkerng T.

Obviously, it basically the same question, imo.

Anonymous

That's why I posted the near-duplicate comment . . . but,

Anonymous

I'm not sure if it really qualifies as a duplicate, so I didn't vote to close

Damkerng T.

Me neither. To me, the second one should be the one the OP asked in the first place.

Anonymous

It's more of a follow-up question because they weren't satisfied with the answer on the first one

Damkerng T.

04:51

Hah! I typed "Me neither" without thinking.

Anonymous

Which is a reasonable thing to do.

Damkerng T.

I think I use both. :-)

Anonymous

Oh, hold on a moment.

Damkerng T.

@snailboat It's hard to satisfy what wasn't asked. To me, only if the OP asked the meaning in the first place, things would be different.

Even the title "Is my understanding of this quote right?" is not the true underlying question of the OP, the way I see it.

Anonymous

When I check my private corpus, here's what I find:

GATA

04:55

Morning :) wow you are still here :)

Damkerng T.

Yes. We are still here. :D

Anonymous

Me either is significantly more common than me neither

Anonymous

However! They aren't really in free variation

Anonymous

People are very consistent in which one they say!

Anonymous

I find almost zero instances of the same person using both phrases.

Damkerng T.

04:56

Must be because I'm a non-native speaker.

Anonymous

Hmm?

Damkerng T.

I think I pronounce either both ways too. I can't tell exactly when I use which.

Anonymous

Oh, I didn't mean that you shouldn't use both :-)

Anonymous

Yeah, I'm pretty sure I've pronounced it both ways.

GATA

In my language we use "me either" in both negative and positive ways

Anonymous

04:57

I am collating! Yippee!

Anonymous

Ah, Japanese is like that.

Damkerng T.

Umm... I'm not sure about your collating.

Anonymous

I am! Hooray for collation!

Damkerng T.

Sounds like you're summarizing some data.

As in food?

Or maybe "me either" vs. "me neither".

Anonymous

I can't recall having ever collated food.

Damkerng T.

04:59

BRB in a few minutes.

Anonymous

Wow, when I pull in chat logs, me either is even more overwhelmingly favored

Anonymous

Of course, that's because I account for half of my own chat logs ;-)

Damkerng T.

I'm rather sure of it.

GATA

lol

Damkerng T.

:D

Like if you searched for "farewell" in here, most results must be mine. :D

GATA

05:02

"farewell "is more common in British English, yes?

Damkerng T.

Hmm... I've never thought of it that way before.

And this novel was written by an American. :-)

GATA

novel ? American? Ernest. H

Damkerng T.

Yes.

A Farewell to Arms

Anonymous

In informal online chat, I said me neither 5 times and me either 284 times.

Damkerng T.

Hah!

Anonymous

05:07

That's just me--not a comment on anyone else. Although among the people I talk to, me either is most common.

Anonymous

The people in my logs who favor me neither fit into several categories, it seems.

Anonymous

Canadians, non-native speakers, and fellow Illinoisans.

Anonymous

My brother among them!

GATA

@DamkerngT. Iv read .one of E.H Short stories called "The Short Happy Life of Francis Macomber".

Damkerng T.

I tried Google Ngram for "Me neither" vs "Me either". The ratio was about 2:1 for AmE, and 3:1 or 4:1 for BrE.

@GATA I didn't read that one yet. But I'm sure it's good to read.

Anonymous

05:09

It's interesting that, of the hundred or so people I have data on me (n)either for, all of the non-native speakers favor me neither

Damkerng T.

(I read his short story about cat, already forgot its title.)

@snailboat Must be because of grammar books.

Here, we're still taught: Hello, how are you? -- I'm fine. Thank you, and you?

GATA

@DamkerngT. Yeah it is a nice story.

Here too :)

Damkerng T.

Perhaps it's everywhere. :-)

Anonymous

We've got chat logs here on SE, too.

Anonymous

> Me either.
> Me either. :-)
> Me neither.
> Me neither!
> Me neither!
> Me neither!
> Me neither!
> Probably. Me neither.
> Me neither.
> Me neither!
> @snailplane Me neither! :D
> Me neither.
> Me neither. :-)
> Me neither. I'm reading the script.
> Me neither.
> Me neither. :)
> Me neither.
> Me neither.
> Me neither!
> Me neither. :)
> Me neither.
> Me neither. To me, the second one should be the one the OP asked in the first place.

Anonymous

05:13

These are all things you've said on SE chat, Damkerng. You favor neither at a 10:1 ratio.

Damkerng T.

Most of them are neither. Hehe. :D

It's hard to fight what we've been taught the first time.

Anonymous

Well, you don't have to fight me neither. It's fine. :-)

Damkerng T.

Lucky me. :D

GATA

Would you please check the way that I have used "flagrant" in this sentence ? "Yet another Flagrant move by Google, They want to take the rein of Internet, This is monopoly I think"

Anonymous

@GATA Capitalizing flagrant won't make your point any stronger.

Anonymous

05:15

That's true of they and this too, I suppose.

Anonymous

Flagrant seems okay there.

Damkerng T.

Other than that, it sounds okay to me.

Anonymous

It's really the last two clauses I'm worried about

Damkerng T.

perhaps, the Internet.

Anonymous

Yeah, no one talks about INTERNET anymore, we all say "the internet" or such.

Damkerng T.

05:16

the rein of Internet is something new to me.

Anonymous

It's been losing its capital I for some time now. You're still free to capitalize it if you like, I think.

GATA

the internet seems better

Damkerng T.

Maybe, I think. I'm still used to it, though.

Anonymous

Sure. You can capitalize it if you like.

GATA

Capitalizing flagrant was a typo :)

@DamkerngT. it doesn't make sense to you ?

"Take the rein of Internet"

Damkerng T.

05:19

It does make sense. It's just that I've never heard it being phrased like that before.

Do we need to pluralize the word the rein?

GATA

why?

Damkerng T.

I'm not sure. As I said, I'm not familiar with this pattern, and Macmillan said [PLURAL].

macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/rein

GATA

Ah I think you are right?

YES you are right :)

Thanks.

Damkerng T.

My pleasure. :)

I learned something new too.

Anonymous

This is monopoly is a little weird, too.

GATA

05:25

I was just going to ask you about that :)

Damkerng T.

It's one my favorite games. :-)

This is Monopoly.

:D

Utkarsh

Happy holi days

Damkerng T.

Hello, oh, I was confused for a while.

GATA

@snailboat Would you please tell me why?

Utkarsh

@DamkerngT. why?

Anonymous

05:27

I'm confused now! I thought you meant Holi :-)

GATA

@Utkarsh Hi :)

Damkerng T.

@Utkarsh whatever snailboat said

Anonymous

@GATA It's a little difficult. I didn't tell you what to change it to because I wasn't sure off the top of my head what the best phrasing would be . . .

Anonymous

But monopoly at least would probably be a monopoly, and possibly this is might be they're a?

Utkarsh

@GATA hello!

Anonymous

05:30

Oh, I found one person with 3 neithers and 2 eithers.

Damkerng T.

books.google.com/ngrams/…

@snailboat Who is it?

Anonymous

I don't have enough data to say if they use both equally.

Damkerng T.

I found "This is monopoly" in Google Ngram, but it seems like the phrase is fading.

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. Um, this is from my private data again. I'm not going to give you the names of the people I'm characterizing :-)

GATA

"They're" but I am referring to what Google does not the Google.

Damkerng T.

05:32

@snailboat That's understandable. :D

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. It's still fine if you contextualize it properly.

Anonymous

I'm not sure it's really enough of a collocation that you can talk about it fading though

GATA

One more question :) is it correct to say : "A bundle sustains its contents"

Anonymous

@GATA It seems grammatical but I'm not sure what it means

Damkerng T.

It reminds me of one of Aesop's fables.

Found it! books.google.com/books?id=B8t5TS560RgC&pg=PA18

Not easy to read, but the pictures are nice enough.

Anonymous

05:38

I can't load that page.

Damkerng T.

Perhaps .com is easier to load.

Anonymous

I can, however, open it from .com, yes. :-)

Anonymous

Although it's not really easier so much as it works and the other one doesn't

Damkerng T.

Hehe. Agree. :D

GATA

Sustain= hold/keep the contents together.

How do we usually use "sustain"?

Damkerng T.

05:40

Something sustains something.

Anonymous

Another version: umass.edu/aesop/content.php?n=4&i=1

Damkerng T.

@snailboat Your version is easier to read, but I like pictures in the other version better.

Oh, I think the wordings are different, too.

Anonymous

Yes, it's a different translation

Anonymous

I always think it's interesting seeing multiple translations :-)

Damkerng T.

Me too!

(Do we need a stable translation for this? :-)

Anonymous

05:45

translationparty.com/#11284247

Anonymous

> He is known as a bunch of lead wire 1.

Damkerng T.

I got this:

> My father claims is always my son and his family. Heal the conflict by his encouragement, he fails, he gives the split. Practical illustrations of the bad decision. For this purpose one day t said.

Anonymous

I got this:

Anonymous

> My father claims is always my son and his family. Heal the conflict by his encouragement, he fails, he gives the split. Practical illustrations of the bad decision. He is known as a bunch of lead wire 1.

Damkerng T.

Strange that they're a little different.

Anonymous

05:47

I see why, too.

Anonymous

It only stores the first 255 characters.

Damkerng T.

Ahh... I see.

GATA

"bundle" and "package" are very alike but what does it exactly mean when we say "bundled package".

Damkerng T.

Somehow I learned it in programming context, this "bundled package".

A "package" that has many components inside bundled together.

GATA

Cant they simply say "a bundle".

Damkerng T.

05:52

Of course, they can, imo.

I think "bundled package" emphasizes that it's a package. That's all.

GATA

Yes I think so. Thank you :)

Damkerng T.

No problem. :-)

Anonymous

In a technical context, terms can take on specific meanings they don't usually have

Anonymous

adv-r.had.co.nz/Package-basics.html

Anonymous

> A package bundle is a compressed version of a package in a single file.

Anonymous

05:57

(In the context of R)

Damkerng T.

Ah, that's R.

I didn't use it often enough, but it's fun, iirc.

Anonymous

You might run across linguists that use R for various data-y things sometimes. :-)

Damkerng T.

And many things are done in MATLAB. :(

GATA

@snailboat Thanks :) I hadn't thought about it in that way.

Anonymous

I don't have MATLAB, but I do have Octave!

Damkerng T.

05:59

I use Maxima!

Transcript for