Eva scrobe in response to B.B. -
i've just come in from the garden planting salvias and one Harrison rose
- the harrison is my homage to the europeans who settled this valley and
they brought with them dry roots of roses from New York and New England -
and only the harrison seems to have survived over the last hundred and
forty years - and since my house is one of the few in town that doesn't
have a harrison and since the house is one of the ten oldest buildings in
town, i figured that i should put in a harrison. the local newspaper of
1873 notes that Frank De La Mar, an irishman of south carolinian roots,
planted eglantine (the rose of shakespeare), amongst many other
"shrubberies". of course, no one passing by on rose street and noticing
the yellow harrison rose in my garden will have a clue as to what it was
that brought about it's planting - as Eva notes, there's no one single
"mechanism".
>
>
>Now, joking apart, I should not imply that there is one single "mechanism"
>behind the mailflow on this list (or any other I know of). Whatever the
>social order is that produces this mailstream, it is not a monolith (as
>Eric seems to suggest). The list has more than one function and people
>post
>for more than one reason... no, make that: people post for more than one
>single SET of reasons (see what I mean?)
so, Eva, i think i see what you mean, as my horticultural annecdote may
illustrate.
>
>
>But what you report from
>the realms of calculation could be rephrased into saying that this
>mailstream is produced by a participantry that is broader and more stable
>than Zipf would predict, right? Now, is that a good thing or a bad thing?
one thing in particular i've noticed about the listing of who has posted
what, Eva, is that the names are not the same as what they were several
years back. well, there are many of the same names, but the regularity of
postings some time back was from a different group than now - and it
seems to me that we're working towards a different stability of folks
writing with regularity. neither good nor bad but different.
well, my son and his girlfriend have gone mushroom hunting - and i've
got a peach cobbler to bake - and several submitted articles to edit, so
.....
or yeah - i'm reading your field notes with great interest, Bill.
wonderful! thank you!
later,
phillip
* * * * * * * *
* *
The English noun "identity" comes, ultimately, from the
Latin adverb "identidem", which means "repeatedly."
The Latin has exactly the same rhythm as the English,
buh-BUM-buh-BUM - a simple iamb, repeated; and
"identidem" is, in fact, nothing more than a
reduplication of the word "idem", "the same":
"idem(et)idem". "Same(and) same". The same,
repeated. It is a word that does exactly what
it means.
from "The Elusive Embrace" by Daniel
Mendelsohn.
phillip white
doctoral student http://ceo.cudenver.edu/~hacms_lab/index.html
scrambling a dissertation
denver, colorado
phillip_white@ceo.cudenver.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 01 2001 - 01:01:57 PDT