No subject

Sun Jul 19 19:54:31 CDT 2009

-----
"Say Good Bye to the expensive traditional way of obtaining inbound SIP 
DIDs (VoIP virtual Phone numbers) through the local telephone companies."
-----

I've also seen this for years in correspondence from Indian technicians 
on various mailing lists, as well as intra-organisationally in various 
past jobs.

I cannot identify any consistent criterion which the words capitalised 
in the middle of sentences above meet.  It's certainly not nouns;  many 
of the words are adjectives.  It's not adjectives;  many nouns are 
capitalised too.  In the first example, "telecom" in "telecom vertical" 
is non-capitalised in the first paragraph, but is in the second 
("Telecom verticals").

While I assume that the unconventional and grammatically impoverished 
aspects are not under dispute, at the same time this tendency is too 
predictable, consistently visible, and anchored to writers from that 
part of the world to have the random properties of a truly chaotic 
system.  The distribution is not sufficiently uniform to just chalk it 
up to ill-grammarred writing.  I haven't seen this from other authors 
hailing from other parts of the world whose English writing is also 
certifiably poor, or, at the very least, deviant from curricular 
standard in the US, Canada and the British Commonwealth.  I also don't 
see this from people in other former British colonial countries in, for 
example, Africa.

There are other widespread signature errors from people from other 
places, but not that particular one.  They are easier to explain because 
they seem - mostly - to fall into the following two categories:

1) The conscious or unconscious application of syntax, stylistic 
conventions, habits of expression and formulation, etc. from another 
language to English.

2) Written expression of the idiosyncrasies of regional English 
dialects, pidgin languages, etc.

Those are all quite understandable.  This capitalisation thing has got 
me stumped, though.  There is obviously a deliberate intent at work 
here, even if it's being applied incompletely or incorrectly/sloppily 
even in terms of what must be its own internally consistent rules.

So, can anyone help me out here?  What are the "rules" governing such 
capitalisation, whether or not they are being properly observed in the 
samples I chose?  Why does this characteristic seem to be particular to 
India and Pakistan, and not other former British colonial and/or 
Commonwealth nations?

If I had to take a wild stab at it, I would guess that the time at which 
English-language was established in India by the British intersected 
somehow with an era in which it was fashionable to capitalise nouns 
other than proper nouns, rather in the German manner - which was the 
case during the Victorian era, I gather.  I'm sure capitalisation 
practices that seem dubious from a contemporary perspective obtained 
widely in 18th century written English as well, and probably before it.
But this doesn't explain why the same trend is not seen in other former 
British colonies that were acquired in the 19th century, nor shed any 
light on the underlying intent or "rules" -- I certainly can't infer any 
guidelines from what I see.

If someone could shed some light on this, I would be intrigued.

Thanks!

-- Alex

[1] http://www.ngtlive.com/inner-left-sidebar/b2b-solutions

[2] http://www.didforsale.com/moreinfo.php

-- 
Alex Balashov - Principal
Evariste Systems
Web     : http://www.evaristesys.com/
Tel     : (+1) (678) 954-0670
Direct  : (+1) (678) 954-0671

_______________________________________________
--Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com--

AstriCon 2009 - October 13 - 15 Phoenix, Arizona
Register Now: http://www.astricon.net

asterisk-biz mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
  http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz

--0-1355055380-1254994434=:77110
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

<html><head><style type="text/css"></style></head><body><div style="font-family:'times new roman', 'new york', times, serif;font-size:12pt">
<meta http-equiv="x-dns-prefetch-control" content="off"><div style="font-family:'times new roman', 'new york', times, serif;font-size:12pt;"><div>Hello Alex Sir,</div><div> </div><div>I have seen your comment on various websites but I am sorry to tell you that if you will review your own website "<a target="_blank" href="http://www.evaristesys.com/&quot;.There">http://www.evaristesys.com/".There</a> are many spelling mistakes in content of home page of websites,so its better to improve ourself&nbsp;every time&nbsp;and not to waste time to comment on others.</div><div> </div><div>I hope you will not mind my comment
 and improve yourself.</div><div style="font-family:times new roman, new york, times, serif;font-size:12pt;"> <div style="font-family:arial, helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;"><hr size="1">From: Alex Balashov &lt;abalashov at evaristesys.com&gt; To: Commercial and Business-Oriented Asterisk Discussion &lt;asterisk-biz at lists.digium.com&gt; Sent: Thu, October 8, 2009 1:25:56 PM Subject: [asterisk-biz] Capitalisation in English writing from Indian subcontinent 
This recent discussion got me wondering again about something which has perplexed me for a while:&nbsp; the unusual (from an Anglo-American perspective) capitalisation patterns - chiefly of nouns - that seem to consistently occur in technical and commercial copy we see that is authored in India or Pakistan, presumably by speakers of the various native English adaptations and/or dialects.&nbsp; To a lesser but nontrivial extent, I've also seen this from the Middle East. I suppose, in the interest of political correctness, that I ought to preface this inquiry with the disclaimer that this is not intended to offend anyone.&nbsp; I realise I am quite known to make jabs from time to time at various people's web sites and solicitations for poor proofreading, bad spelling and grammar, etc. where it is obvious (to me, anyway) that the cause is laziness and inattention rather than something like a genuine
 struggle with a foreign language. In this case, my interest is purely academic;&nbsp; I wouldn't waste time writing this missive if it weren't.&nbsp; There are far more economical and brief ways to call someone specific out for sloppiness, and non-native English speakers have no kind of monopoly on sloppiness anyway. All this to say: if you happen to be a non-native English speaker from the aforementioned regions, don't bristle -- please take the question in the spirit in which it's intended. Here are some examples of what I am referring to: From <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://www.ngtlive.com">www.ngtlive.com</a>[1]: ----- "As a well known B2B expert of telecom vertical, we have delivered applications that are meant to address ever emerging business requirements. At NGT live we strive to develop and design world class communication solutions and applications that
 offer
 operational flexibility to business processes. These applications cover various core segments of Telecom verticals. Whether there is a need for B2B Integration, Enterprise Application integration or a Mobile Commerce portal, our globally acclaimed solutions deliver business innovation capabilities and improved customer services to several industry domains." ----- From <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://www.super-phone.com">www.super-phone.com</a> (front page): ----- "Use your Favorite Instant Messenger like [icons] to make or receive Phone calls." ----- From <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://didforsale.com">didforsale.com</a>[2]: ----- "Say Good Bye to the expensive traditional way of obtaining inbound SIP DIDs (VoIP virtual Phone numbers) through the local telephone companies." ----- I've also seen this for years in correspondence
 from Indian technicians on
 various mailing lists, as well as intra-organisationally in various past jobs. I cannot identify any consistent criterion which the words capitalised in the middle of sentences above meet.&nbsp; It's certainly not nouns;&nbsp; many of the words are adjectives.&nbsp; It's not adjectives;&nbsp; many nouns are capitalised too.&nbsp; In the first example, "telecom" in "telecom vertical" is non-capitalised in the first paragraph, but is in the second ("Telecom verticals"). While I assume that the unconventional and grammatically impoverished aspects are not under dispute, at the same time this tendency is too predictable, consistently visible, and anchored to writers from that part of the world to have the random properties of a truly chaotic system.&nbsp; The distribution is not sufficiently uniform to just chalk it up to ill-grammarred writing.&nbsp; I haven't seen this from other authors
 hailing from other parts of the world whose English writing is also certifiably poor, or, at the very least, deviant from curricular standard in the US, Canada and the British Commonwealth.&nbsp; I also don't see this from people in other former British colonial countries in, for example, Africa. There are other widespread signature errors from people from other places, but not that particular one.&nbsp; They are easier to explain because they seem - mostly - to fall into the following two categories: 1) The conscious or unconscious application of syntax, stylistic conventions, habits of expression and formulation, etc. from another language to English. 2) Written expression of the idiosyncrasies of regional English dialects, pidgin languages, etc. Those are all quite understandable.&nbsp; This capitalisation thing has got me stumped, though.&nbsp; There is obviously a deliberate
 intent at work here, even if it's being applied incompletely or incorrectly/sloppily even in terms of what must be its own internally consistent rules. So, can anyone help me out here?&nbsp; What are the "rules" governing such capitalisation, whether or not they are being properly observed in the samples I chose?&nbsp; Why does this characteristic seem to be particular to India and Pakistan, and not other former British colonial and/or Commonwealth nations? If I had to take a wild stab at it, I would guess that the time at which English-language was established in India by the British intersected somehow with an era in which it was fashionable to capitalise nouns other than proper nouns, rather in the German manner - which was the case during the Victorian era, I gather.&nbsp; I'm sure capitalisation practices that seem dubious from a contemporary perspective obtained widely in 18th century
 written English as well, and probably before it. But this doesn't explain why the same trend is not seen in other former British colonies that were acquired in the 19th century, nor shed any light on the underlying intent or "rules" -- I certainly can't infer any guidelines from what I see. If someone could shed some light on this, I would be intrigued. Thanks! -- Alex [1] <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ngtlive.com/inner-left-sidebar/b2b-solutions">http://www.ngtlive.com/inner-left-sidebar/b2b-solutions</a> [2] <a target="_blank" href="http://www.didforsale.com/moreinfo.php">http://www.didforsale.com/moreinfo.php</a> -- Alex Balashov - Principal Evariste Systems Web&nbsp; &nbsp; : <a target="_blank" href="http://www.evaristesys.com/">http://www.evaristesys.com/</a> Tel&nbsp; &nbsp; : (+1) (678) 954-0670 Direct&nbsp; : (+1) (678)
 954-0671 _______________________________________________ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by <a target="_blank" href="http://www.api-digital.com">http://www.api-digital.com</a>-- AstriCon 2009 - October 13 - 15 Phoenix, Arizona Register Now: <a target="_blank" href="http://www.astricon.net">http://www.astricon.net</a> asterisk-biz mailing
 list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: &nbsp; <a target="_blank" href="http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz">http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz</a> </div></div><div style=""></div></div><div style="position:fixed"></div></div>

      </body></html>
--0-1355055380-1254994434=:77110--