Shavian eGroup Archive Browser

Hi Star
I hunted around on the Internet, and found an opinion on the various
American accents (dialects?). I hope it provides a good compromise point of
view. I searched using Google with search arguements (general american
dialect accent). It supports the idea that there are only 3 prestige
accents in the United States that people consistently recognize. (Eastern,
Southern, Western) Northern or the Yankee accent is out of favour these
days except for revivals of "Our Town". I excerpted it below.

WHAT IS "STANDARD" ENGLISH? Part 2

In the first part of this article we looked at British English. We
concluded that there were many varieties of Standard English in the United
Kingdom and that the old notion of Received Pronunciation (or Oxford
English) is now probably in the process of being replaced by so-called
"Estuary English" (in a vast swathe of England south-east of a line from
the Solent to the Wash). The growing influence of mid-Atlantic, a hybrid of
American and British English much-favoured by British radio disc-jockeys,
was also considered. In this part we will examine American English and
attempt to identify whether there is a "standard", and whether there are
any dialectical trends that are likely to emerge as American English develops.
As a starting-point we should distinguish between the notions of accent and
dialect. Accent refers solely to distinctive pronunciation, whereas dialect
additionally incorporates differences in grammar, syntax and lexis. It is
common to refer to a "British accent" or an "American accent" and here we
are concerned exclusively with aspects of pronunciation that distinguish
these two general types of accent. Likewise, we could also refer to someone
speaking with a South African accent or an Australian accent. Within
American English itself, however, there are numerous dialects and also
different accents. To those of us raised on a diet of American films and
television programmes, three distinct accents tend to emerge: the slow,
measured "twang" of the Southern states of the USA, the distinctive New
York accents and "the rest". No doubt there are numerous sub-divisions
within these general categories and a native of Kentucky would argue that
he or she could easily distinguish between the accent of his or her native
state and that of neighbouring Tennessee, for example. But, in general, as
far as accent alone is concerned, American English can be grouped into
these three general areas. Having said that, it is interesting to note the
development of other accents and dialects within this general framework.
One of the most notable is the growth of Black English Vernacular, a
dialect that has grown along with the urban ghettos in major US cities.
Another addition to the melting pot that is American English has been the
similarly rapid rise of Hispanic American English with its own distinctive
accent and lexis. If we add to this the millions of immigrants from a huge
variety of linguistic backgrounds from around the world, each bringing
their own pronunciation and lexis to the world’s most cosmopolitan society
(food vocabulary is a good example of the latter), it is clear that the
influences on American English are incredibly wide-ranging. Yet, broadly
speaking the pronunciation of American English has remained fairly
constant. If we are looking for any significant changes in American English
in the near future these are more likely to be in the form of lexical items
either imported by new immigrants to the USA or borrowed from the Black and
Hispanic populations. At this stage, American English is extremely unlikely
to be influenced by other external varieties of English, such as British
English, although it is interesting to note that the non-rhotic (where the
‘r’ is not pronounced in words like ‘farm’) accent typical of British RP is
regarded as "posh" when used by Americans. Indeed, a survey of reactions of
Boston shop assistants to different accents found that they were more
polite and subservient to customers who spoke with non-rhotic accents – an
interesting echo of the UK!
As the world’s most powerful economy and the world’s most active media
base, it is clear that the USA plays a significant role in the development
of English. Many neologisms (for example the tendency to verbalise nouns as
in "to downsize") originate in the USA and rapidly find their way, usually
via the media and films, into other varieties of English. Whereas in the
19th and early 20th centuries it was British English that spread around the
world as a result of the power of the British Empire, in the second half of
the 20th century and now in the early years of the 21st century, it is
American English that is showing the increasingly dominant influence.

Regards, Paul V.

P.S. Seems to suggest that a good starting point to attract students of the
Shaw Alphabet, would be to provide lessons on the Western or General
American Accent.

__________________attached____________________
At 03:53 PM 3/11/03 +0000, you wrote:
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Star Raven
>
> > I assure you that there is not one single widely spoken accent in america.
>
>For purposes of generalisation, there is a dialect referred to by
>phonologists as "General American". It is referred to in almost every
>phonetics book I've come across, as is "R.P." for the British 'general'
>dialect.
>
>General American is as close to a reference dialect as you can get. The main
>point to notice about G.A. is that it does not distinguish between 'ah' and
>'on', as the majority of speakers of U.S. apparently do not. It may not be
>'the most widely spoken accent in America', but it is without a doubt the
>phoneme set that SHOULD be the basis of any US-Eng-friendly Shaw Alphabet.
>
>Hugh B
>
>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/





Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT

<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=245327.3054233.4378052.1612068/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1430287/R=2/id=noscript/*http://www.poetry.com/contest/contest.asp?Suite=A33405>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=245327.3054233.4378052.1612068/D=egroupmail/S=:HM/A=1430287/rand=923995044>

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .

True that the paper shows thought, but is it fair? Who wrote it, and
with what background? the downside of the internet is that I could have
a website that is just as well written, that refutes it. I would rather
that we try and make this more available, using each our own accents
and dialects. The point is, as others have said, to make shavian known.

No one will win with this squbbling over accents. You will never
convince a southerner that there is one southern accent, you will never
convince any British person that there is one sing british accent. I am
a voice coach, I myself know that there is a difference and I try and
learn to differentiate. to your point, though I will never convince you
that each state has its own accent and dialect. The paper that you sent
did proove an interesting point. There is a difference in lexis, syntax
and pronunciation. That is what makes a different accent. Mark Twain
saw this, why cant anyone else? I mean, if Hollywood were in the south,
who knows how different it would be.

But, as i said, we should not waste our breath (or fingers) sqabbling
over a topic which some of us feel strongly about and others simply do
not understand.

We must make shavian known, If that means transliterating, then should
we not do it as we would do it for ourselves? By this I mean that we
should transliterate to our speach. Bet that non rhotic, be that with
the "twang" of the "single southern accent" that you clame there is, be
that with one of the many New york accents, be that with African
american "ebonics" or what, we should do it. We should simply do it
without a dictionary and allow one to emerge. TO was around and spelled
as the writer felt it should be spelled long LONG before there was a
dictionary.

Our fault, dear friends, is not in our dictionaries but in ourselves.

--Star

=====
"Alright, enough with the storyline, let's get back to the monster killing...Hello!"

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Web Hosting - establish your business online
http://webhosting.yahoo.com


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT

<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=245327.3054233.4378052.1612068/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1430287/R=2/id=noscript/*http://www.poetry.com/contest/contest.asp?Suite=A33405>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=245327.3054233.4378052.1612068/D=egroupmail/S=:HM/A=1430287/rand=994310860>

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .

--- In shavian@..., "Hugh Birkenhead"

> General American is as close to a reference dialect as you can
get.

………

. It may not be
> 'the most widely spoken accent in America', but it is without a
doubt the
> phoneme set that SHOULD be the basis of any
US-Eng-friendly Shaw Alphabet.
>
> Hugh B

No, No, and NO!



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT

<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=245327.3054233.4378052.1612068/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1430287/R=2/id=noscript/*http://www.poetry.com/contest/contest.asp?Suite=A33405>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=245327.3054233.4378052.1612068/D=egroupmail/S=:HM/A=1430287/rand=467106832>

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .

Hi Star

Thanks for admitting that question of multiple American English accents is
a side issue and we should concentrate on teaching students to write their
speech with the Shaw Alphabet.

Now, obviously there are many ways to learn to write Shaw.
You expressed that in your opinion the ideal way is for the speaker to
transcribe his own speech phonetically.
I agree this is ideal, but it is unrealistic for everyone to go this route.
Few people nowadays have the phonetic expertise to hear and analyze their
speech into the correct Shaw Letters.
As a voice coach, you have some understanding of what it takes to gain that
expertise.
Maybe people can develop that expertise using the Shaw Alphabet, without a
tutor, but it is not an easy road. It is rather like pulling yourself up by
your own bootstraps.

Obviously, it would be best to learn from a tutor with an ear for accents.
Let me suggest for most people, they have to learn from a Book, and they
need some prescriptive rules and to make use of a learning guide and an
introductory dictionary.
Maybe, we can have multiple dictionaries for each of the main accent groups.

And perhaps, there are other better ways to learn to write Shaw, but the
ultimate goal is to master Shaw, and that is most important achievement,.
And whatever twisted route it takes to get to that point (level of
competence) is of lesser importance.

I am proceeding with the Shaw Teaching Guide based along the lines of our
discussions, and hope to provide a Dictionary list,
to help the novice Shaw writers to plod over the many learning hurdles.

Regards, Paul V.

P.S. We need to create a critical mass of people conversant with the Shaw
Alphabet.
The technology to use Shaw on the computer and the Internet is there. We
just need to get people on-line.

__________________attached_________________________

At 05:15 AM 3/12/03 -0800, you wrote:
>True that the paper shows thought, but is it fair? Who wrote it, and
>with what background? the downside of the internet is that I could have
>a website that is just as well written, that refutes it. I would rather
>that we try and make this more available, using each our own accents
>and dialects. The point is, as others have said, to make shavian known.
>
>No one will win with this squbbling over accents. You will never
>convince a southerner that there is one southern accent, you will never
>convince any British person that there is one sing british accent. I am
>a voice coach, I myself know that there is a difference and I try and
>learn to differentiate. to your point, though I will never convince you
>that each state has its own accent and dialect. The paper that you sent
>did proove an interesting point. There is a difference in lexis, syntax
>and pronunciation. That is what makes a different accent. Mark Twain
>saw this, why cant anyone else? I mean, if Hollywood were in the south,
>who knows how different it would be.
>
>But, as i said, we should not waste our breath (or fingers) sqabbling
>over a topic which some of us feel strongly about and others simply do
>not understand.
>
>We must make shavian known, If that means transliterating, then should
>we not do it as we would do it for ourselves? By this I mean that we
>should transliterate to our speach. Bet that non rhotic, be that with
>the "twang" of the "single southern accent" that you clame there is, be
>that with one of the many New york accents, be that with African
>american "ebonics" or what, we should do it. We should simply do it
>without a dictionary and allow one to emerge. TO was around and spelled
>as the writer felt it should be spelled long LONG before there was a
>dictionary.
>
>Our fault, dear friends, is not in our dictionaries but in ourselves.
>
>--Star
>
>=====
>"Alright, enough with the storyline, let's get back to the monster
>killing...Hello!"
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! Web Hosting - establish your business online
>http://webhosting.yahoo.com
>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/





Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT

<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=245327.3054233.4378052.1612068/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1430287/R=2/id=noscript/*http://www.poetry.com/contest/contest.asp?Suite=A33405>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=245327.3054233.4378052.1612068/D=egroupmail/S=:HM/A=1430287/rand=998594758>

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .

Hugh Birkenhead wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Star Raven
>
>
>>I assure you that there is not one single widely spoken accent in america.
>
>
> For purposes of generalisation, there is a dialect referred to by
> phonologists as "General American". It is referred to in almost every
> phonetics book I've come across, as is "R.P." for the British 'general'
> dialect.
>
> General American is as close to a reference dialect as you can get. The main
> point to notice about G.A. is that it does not distinguish between 'ah' and
> 'on', as the majority of speakers of U.S. apparently do not. It may not be
> 'the most widely spoken accent in America', but it is without a doubt the
> phoneme set that SHOULD be the basis of any US-Eng-friendly Shaw Alphabet.
>
> Hugh B

I want to mention a bit about my personal accent, which, being
Midwestern American, is just about as close to General American as
you'll find in general use.

I don't distinguish between "ah" and "on". I normally don't distinguish
between "ah" and "awe", except perhaps with the "word" awwww... (as in,
"Awww, what a cute puppy!") but any distinction is rare. Basically,
"ah", "awe", and "on" are all pronounced (or thought of) the same as ah
in father. If "awe" is pronounced, it is pronounced as British "on",
not British "awe", which is never heard (that I'm aware of.)

"Up" and "ado" are not distinguished phonemically, though they may or
may not be pronounced differently.

"Run" is pronounced as a semi-vowel, just like "yea" and "woe". "Err"
is actually a pure vowel sound, and does not normally contain an "ado",
or schwa sound. "Array" is pronounced like "up" followed by "run", just
like "a ray" (of sunlight) and is never used at the end of a word or
syllable. Basically, "run" is to "err" as "yea" is to "eat" and "woe"
is to "ooze". "Are", "or", "air", and "ear" are all diphthongs, made
from the initial vowel plus the "err" vowel.

This last difference is one of my main complaints regarding Quickscript,
in that the "err" vowel and associated diphthongs have been removed, in
favor of using the consonant "run" like a vowel, which is like merging
"eat" with "yea" and "ooze" with "woe". For someone who holds those
"errs" dear, that is just too much to bear!

I tend to agree that "Standard American" (Midwestern or California
accent, the differences are trivial) should be used whenever a "normal"
American spelling is needed. But it's worth mentioning that American
dictionaries have for many years listed major alternate pronunciations
side by side, usually given as equal to one another. And I do believe
it would be a bad thing to attempt too much in the way of spelling
standardization. Afterall, that's what led to the mess our current
system is in! Sure, it's good to have a standard, but it must be based
completely on the way a common group of people currently talk, and it
must change with their pronunciation, rather than being fixed like our
current spelling was so many years ago.


--
Ethan



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT

<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=245327.3054233.4378052.1612068/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1430287/R=2/id=noscript/*http://www.poetry.com/contest/contest.asp?Suite=A33405>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=245327.3054233.4378052.1612068/D=egroupmail/S=:HM/A=1430287/rand=765050359>

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .

Ethan wrote:

I want to mention a bit about my personal accent, which, being



Midwestern American, is just about as close to General American as
you'll find in general use.

I don't distinguish between "ah" and "on". I normally don't distinguish
between "ah" and "awe", except perhaps with the "word" awwww... (as in,
"Awww, what a cute puppy!") but any distinction is rare.

I live in southern Indiana where many people are from Kentucky. I believe I speak in a Midwestern accent with, perhaps, some southern overlay. I have always distinguished "awe" from "on" and can't imagine why one wouldn't. There is a commercial on television these days in which the announcer pronounces "nautical" as if it were spelled "notical," and I was quite nonplussed by it. It never occurred to me that someone would see "au" and pronounce it as "on". I guess this seems permissible since english spelling is has virtually no rationale anyway so all bets are off as to how a given letter or combination thereof should be pronounced. What does the statement "...British 'awe,' which is never heard..." mean. You are unaware of anyone who pronounces "awe" in your area? For instance, in the sentence, "He was in awe," what does the last word sound like: "ah"or "o"? If that is the case, and I heard the sentence, I probably would not understand the meaning without further explanatory remarks.


Basically,
"ah", "awe", and "on" are all pronounced (or thought of) the same as ah
in father. If "awe" is pronounced, it is pronounced as British "on",
not British "awe", which is never heard (that I'm aware of.)

"Up" and "ado" are not distinguished phonemically, though they may or
may not be pronounced differently.

This I concur with.



"Run" is pronounced as a semi-vowel, just like "yea" and "woe". "Err"
is actually a pure vowel sound, and does not normally contain an "ado",
or schwa sound.

This I don't understand. To me "err" is the schwa sound + "r."

Paige


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT

<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=245327.3054233.4378052.1612068/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1430287/R=2/id=noscript/*http://www.poetry.com/contest/contest.asp?Suite=A33405>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=245327.3054233.4378052.1612068/D=egroupmail/S=:HM/A=1430287/rand=909561839>

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .

The "ah," "on," "awe" distinction seems to vary greatly between
accents -- perhaps more than any other sounds, as far as I know. I
also live in Southern Indiana (though I'm originally from Terre
Haute, so my speech is more representative of, that area); and I
distinguish "awe" when I'm not being lazy with my speech, but "ah,"
and "on" both come out like "ah" when I say them. This is the way i
talk, but I can't say what the "standard" pronunciation is. It just
depends on who's talking.
I take "semi-vowel" as a reference to what I would call an
approximant. This would take a good while to explain fully; but
suffice to say they're barely impeded, and they're almost like vowels.
Actually, "err" is a pure vowel sound. It's a rhotic schwer
(not schwa). "Err" and "array" don't contain any true R sounds. And
the distinction between them is not really significant. "Err" occurs
only in stressed syllables, and "array" occurs only in unstressed
syllables. The pronunciation is decided by stress, and is no more
significant to meaning than the stress is. There is really no need
to distinguish them in spelling if you know which syllable to
stress. With that in mind, I wish Reed had created some way to
indicate stress in spelling. I've dabbled in creating some
alternative notations of my own, and the method I've come to like
best is to use an apostrophe (') before a syllable with primary
stress, and a comma (,) to indicate secondary stress (if desired).
Both would come before the syllable they mark. I don't mean to try
to change the way we use Shavian, but this could be useful for obsure
words or to distinguish between words that are otherwise identical.

-AllegroX


--- In shavian@..., "C. Paige Gabhart" <pgabhart@c...>
wrote:
>
>
> Ethan wrote:
>
> I want to mention a bit about my personal accent, which, being
>
> >Midwestern American, is just about as close to General American as
> >you'll find in general use.
> >
> >I don't distinguish between "ah" and "on". I normally don't
distinguish
> >between "ah" and "awe", except perhaps with the "word" awwww...
(as in,
> >"Awww, what a cute puppy!") but any distinction is rare.
> >
> I live in southern Indiana where many people are from Kentucky. I
> believe I speak in a Midwestern accent with, perhaps, some southern
> overlay. I have always distinguished "awe" from "on" and can't
imagine
> why one wouldn't. There is a commercial on television these days
in
> which the announcer pronounces "nautical" as if it were spelled
> "notical," and I was quite nonplussed by it. It never occurred to
me
> that someone would see "au" and pronounce it as "on". I guess this
> seems permissible since english spelling is has virtually no
rationale
> anyway so all bets are off as to how a given letter or combination
> thereof should be pronounced. What does the statement "...British
> 'awe,' which is never heard..." mean. You are unaware of anyone
who
> pronounces "awe" in your area? For instance, in the sentence, "He
was
> in awe," what does the last word sound like: "ah"or "o"? If that
is
> the case, and I heard the sentence, I probably would not understand
the
> meaning without further explanatory remarks.
>
> > Basically,
> >"ah", "awe", and "on" are all pronounced (or thought of) the same
as ah
> >in father. If "awe" is pronounced, it is pronounced as
British "on",
> >not British "awe", which is never heard (that I'm aware of.)
> >
> >"Up" and "ado" are not distinguished phonemically, though they may
or
> >may not be pronounced differently.
> >
> This I concur with.
>
> >"Run" is pronounced as a semi-vowel, just like "yea"
and "woe". "Err"
> >is actually a pure vowel sound, and does not normally contain
an "ado",
> >or schwa sound.
> >
> This I don't understand. To me "err" is the schwa sound + "r."
>
> Paige



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT

<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=245327.3054233.4378052.1612068/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1430287/R=2/id=noscript/*http://www.poetry.com/contest/contest.asp?Suite=A33405>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=245327.3054233.4378052.1612068/D=egroupmail/S=:HM/A=1430287/rand=576647872>

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .

I've been thinking about this for some time myself. I was
thinking maybe I could get a shirt made with a catchy phrase written
in Shavian just to get people asking. Perhaps a quote from Shaw,
something like "Nothing is ever done in this world until men are
prepared to kill one another if it is not done." That's my
favorite. How does that idea sound to you? Do you have any other
suggestions for what to put on it?

-AllegroX



--- In shavian@..., Star Raven <celestraof12worlds@y...>
wrote:
> My point exactly, Ethan. But perhaps if we use in in our everyday
> dealings, then those around us will be intrigued by it. It is this
> interest that we need to develop. Perhaps we as a group should
think of
> ways to expand the use of it. We could transliterate popular works
into
> shavian, ect, and make these available to the public.
>
> just a thought,
> --Star
>
>
> > I have to agree, Shavian should be encouraged as a means of
> > communication for the masses, rather than as a means of secure
> > writing,
> > which really can only give you a false sense of security. Think
> > about
> > it - security is really one of the worst uses for Shavian! Why?
> > because you really have no control whatsoever over who may or may
not
> >
> > understand Shavian, and the irony is that the person who knows
> > Shavian
> > is practically guaranteed to read your writing if they get a
chance!
> > Also, you automatically generate curiosity and fascination in
people
> > when they see your writing, and is that really what you want if
you
> > are
> > trying to be discreet?
> >
> > In my prying around the internet, I seem to find the opinion
stated
> > quite often that "Shavian will never be accepted..." but that will
> > only
> > be the case if those of us who know Shavian fail to expose it to
the
> > public eye. Well, at least exposing it to people can't help but
do
> > some
> > good, while treating it like a "secret code" does very little
good at
> >
> > all, if any. And that's just my two cents worth.
> >
> > --
> > Ethan
> >
> >
>
>
> =====
> "Alright, enough with the storyline, let's get back to the monster
killing...Hello!"
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
> http://taxes.yahoo.com/



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT

<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=245327.3054233.4378052.1612068/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1430287/R=2/id=noscript/*http://www.poetry.com/contest/contest.asp?Suite=A33405>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=245327.3054233.4378052.1612068/D=egroupmail/S=:HM/A=1430287/rand=112303140>

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the
unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world
to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the
unreasonable man."

--- Joe <allegrox_2000@...> wrote:
> I've been thinking about this for some time
> myself. I was
> thinking maybe I could get a shirt made with a
> catchy phrase written
> in Shavian just to get people asking. Perhaps a
> quote from Shaw,
> something like "Nothing is ever done in this world
> until men are
> prepared to kill one another if it is not done."
> That's my
> favorite. How does that idea sound to you? Do you
> have any other
> suggestions for what to put on it?
>
> -AllegroX
>



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT

<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=245327.3054233.4378052.1612068/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1430287/R=2/id=noscript/*http://www.poetry.com/contest/contest.asp?Suite=A33405>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=245327.3054233.4378052.1612068/D=egroupmail/S=:HM/A=1430287/rand=912288559>

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .

"The things most people want to know about are usually
none of their business."

(if you are sort of anti-social).

> --- Joe <allegrox_2000@...> wrote:
> I've been thinking about this for some time
> myself. I was
> thinking maybe I could get a shirt made with a
> catchy phrase written
> in Shavian just to get people asking. Perhaps a
> quote from Shaw,
> something like "Nothing is ever done in this world
> until men are
> prepared to kill one another if it is not done."
> That's my
> favorite. How does that idea sound to you? Do you
> have any other suggestions for what to put on it?
>
> -AllegroX
>



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT

<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=245327.3054233.4378052.1612068/D=egroupweb/S=1705213030:HM/A=1430287/R=2/id=noscript/*http://www.poetry.com/contest/contest.asp?Suite=A33405>
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=245327.3054233.4378052.1612068/D=egroupmail/S=:HM/A=1430287/rand=588171470>

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .