On Sat, Oct 07, 2006 at 03:00:05AM -0400, A. Costa wrote: > Again we agree in principle, but I have a question, which requires a bit > of illustration... > > Once again that excerpt, but showing the parts of > speech as well: > > ...the relay_to_domains domainlist, a list of domains... > 1 2 3 4 5 6 > proper noun adjective/noun plural noun > > 1) a variable name in the form of a proper noun that happens to be a > mnemonic or memory aid; its final root word 'domain' reminds us of the > plural noun 'domains', meaning 'internet domains'. > > 2) the noun 'list', modified by the adjective 'domain'; again > the root of that adjective is 'internet domain'. > > 6) a plural noun meaning 'internet domains'. > > In all three instances the idea of the root concept is constant, "internet > domain", only the grammatical parts of speech change: from a noun > (6), to an adjective (2), to a proper noun that reminds us of a noun (1). > > Two examples of the same redundant form (Proper noun/adjective/plural noun): > > ...'Cat Chow' cat food, a food for cats... > ...the 'Computer World' computer trade show, a trade show featuring > computers... > > Few native English speakers would find three different "meanings" of > the word "cat" or "computer" in either example, as grammatical forms > such as plurality, tense, case, etc. are considered subordinate to > meaning. Grammar that's effortless to natives can be difficult for > others. > > Now the question. If I understand correctly, when you mention "three > meanings of the word 'domain'", you're noticing how the > words' grammatical forms are different?
Yes, but I am more referring to their technical meanings. > NB, it's a trick question and a dilemma: answer "yes", > and the passage is redundant. The entire exim4 documentation is a huge piece of redundant documentation pieces. Because people don't read the docs. > Answer "no", and the passage is vague**. Consolation: the latter > would be worse than the former. > > (** vaguer examples: "the cat cat the cat cat", "the cocker > cockered his Cocker", "the doggy dog doggedly dogged Dog the dog.", > all of which are grammatically OK, but imply a surplus of > beasty interpretations.) It is more a case of the classic "plant pot plant in plant pot". How would you word this part of the man page? Greetings Marc -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Marc Haber | "I don't trust Computers. They | Mailadresse im Header Mannheim, Germany | lose things." Winona Ryder | Fon: *49 621 72739834 Nordisch by Nature | How to make an American Quilt | Fax: *49 621 72739835 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
