Connoisseur in a sentence yahoo dating - Navigation menu
But where do you start? You want a piece that will impress your friends with your impeccable taste, sure, but you also want to make a smart and beautiful investment.
Shopping for a big-ticket watch can be intimidating, but armed with the right questions and know-how, you can be confident you're choosing the right one for you. Here, all of the most important elements to consider: There are many fine watchmakers, but one brand stands out as leader of the pack: Because a Rolex watch is not only beautifully designed on the outside, it's what's inside the watch that makes most buyers fall in love.
The watch's internal movement is the engine that makes it tick, and what makes a Rolex truly a Rolex. To some aficionados, a mechanical movement holds the same kind of allure as vinyl records do for music connoisseurs. In the world of mechanical watches, you'll find both manual and automatic options. Manual watches require daily winding to keep time, while an automatic movement winds itself, powered by the regular motion of the wearer.
Deutsche Harmonia Mundi, LP recording 1C Le roman de Fauvel. The Service of Venus and Mars: Music for the Knights of the Garter, — Gothic Voices Christopher Page , dir. CD recording CDA The Spirit of England and France I: Gothic Voices Christopher Page, dir. The Study of Love: Posted by Mark Liberman at I repeat the relevant portion here: Such confusion could only arise in the minds of speakers of Mandarin Chinese or Tibetan who are not literate in either Tibetan or Dzongkha.
Neither Mandarin Chinese nor Tibetan distinguishes phonologically between voiced and voiceless obstruent initials, unlike Dzongkha and, for example, English. Van Driem's point turns on the distinction between voicing and aspiration. If the vocal folds vibrate during the production of a speech sound it is said to be voiced. Otherwise it is voiceless. When making the transition from a consonant to the following voiced vowel, the onset of voicing may occur immediately or it may be delayed by some amount.
If voicing is delayed, the voiceless region at the beginning of the vowel is known as aspiration. The aspiration is the puff of air that you can feel if you wet your finger and hold it in front of your mouth when you say pot in English. To experience the contrast between aspiration and its absence, first say pot, then say spot. You'll notice that there is not much of a puff of air in spot but a noticeable one in pot.
If the consonant is truly voiced, the vocal folds will vibrate during the consonant, with the result that the voice onset occurs prior to the end of the consonant. If voicing starts up right at the transition from consonant to vowel, the VOT is 0. If voicing is delayed and there is aspiration, the VOT is positive. The result is that we can talk about voicing and aspiration as aspects of a single dimension of voice onset time.
Different languages divide the VOT continuum up in different ways. These languages have a true voicing contrast. These languages have an aspiration contrast. And some languages have three categories: One language that distinguishes all three categories is Thai. You can find the audio files here. In the first image I've highlighted the aspiration region. You can see that there is no voicing which shows up as energy near the bottom of the frequency range until the onset of the vowel, but there is a long 70 millisecond noise segment between the release of the stop closure and the onset of voicing.
In the second image there is very little aspiration but no voicing during the stop closure. In the third image you can see voicing during the stop closure as well as some higher frequency noise. Mandarin Chinese has just two series of stops and affricates, one aspirated, the other unaspirated.
There is no voicing contrast. In the first there is a very long aspiration region; in the second there is no appreciable aspiration nor any voicing prior to the onset of the vowel. With this background, we can look again at what van Driem is saying.
He is saying that to those who see the words Dzongkha and Tsong-kha-pa in print, it is obvious that they are different. Similarly, if one hears these words and can distinguish the voiced [dz] from the voiceless [ts], it is clear that they are different. If, however, one does not know how they are written and is unable to perceive the phonetic distinction, due to speaking a language that has no voicing distinction, then they may sound the same.
A speaker of Mandarin Chinese might, he thinks, fail to distinguish these two words because Mandarin has only an aspiration distinction and is therefore not attuned to hear a voicing distinction. For the Mandarin speaker, both [dz] and [ts] fall into the unaspirated category and so do not contrast. So saith the renowned legal scholar Chico Marx.
There is, however, a "liberty clause. Arlen Specter led off with his favorable impressions from a meeting with Alito: I start with his statement that he believes there is a right to privacy under the liberty clause of the United States Constitution. Specter was referring to Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment emphasis mine: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.
No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. Crucially, the right to personal liberty guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment was invoked by the Supreme Court in upholding its decision in Roe v.
It's become a tradition for pro-choice senators like Specter to ask Supreme Court nominees about the "liberty clause," as an indirect way of finding out their thoughts on the validity of Roe.
Last month, there was some controversy over what Harriet Miers told Specter about the "liberty clause. Is it the entirety of Section 1 of the amendment? Just the second sentence? The part of the second sentence between the two semicolons? Or is it simply the word liberty itself? After hearing Specter's comments about Alito, Ponnuru posed a question: I'm not sure when people started talking about a "liberty clause" of the Constitution--I hadn't noticed this until the Roberts hearings.
It seems like a strange way to refer to one word in the Fourteenth Amendment. Are there other one-word "clauses"? This is, on the face of it, further proof of the cultural divide between legal studies and linguistic studies.
A syntactician might think a "one-word clause" in English would need to be an unmodified imperative intransitive verb like "Surrender! But of course, the definition of clause in the world of law has nothing to do with syntactic structures. The legal sense, meaning "a distinct article, stipulation, or proviso in a legal document," has a long history in English. Ponnuru posted a reply from Princeton professor of politics Robert P. If there is a "liberty clause," then there is also a "life clause" that should make Arlen Specter shudder , and even a "property clause" which might not go over well with Democrats.
Of course, what we actually have is a due process clause. George seems to consider the possibility of a "one-word clause" to be rather silly, and then explains that what Specter is really talking about is a "due process clause. So is this provision "actually" the "due process clause," and "liberty clause" is a misnomer? Either way, it's a bit of synechdoche , naming the clause by one of its key elements, either "due process" or "liberty. It's been in use at least since , according to the Nexis and Factiva news databases.
On September 6 of that year, in advance of the contentious Senate hearings for Robert Bork, Anthony Lewis wrote a column in the New York Times detailing Bork's opposition to cases that rely on "the liberty clause of the 14th Amendment.
Had Judge Bork's views been the governing rule on the Supreme Court at the critical moments of the last generation, principles that most Americans have come to accept would have been rejected. There would be no right to privacy. There would be no substantive content to the liberty clause of the 14th Amendment. Bork was of course rejected by the Senate, and his replacement, Anthony Kennedy, was also asked about the "liberty clause" during his December hearings.
In contrast to Bork, Kennedy testified approvingly about the clause and its application to a right of privacy, and he was later confirmed. But it wasn't just pro-choice senators and pundits who were using the phrase "liberty clause.
The construction of the due process clause or as I prefer to call it, the liberty clause, has transformed the Bill of Rights from a mere constraint on federal policy into a source of federal authority to constrain state powers.
Stevens expanded on this speech in a article , "The Bill of Rights: A Century of Progress. Nonetheless, "liberty clause" remains the phrase of choice forgive the pun among pro-abortion-rights senators, who are probably seeking to lend more rhetorical weight to the justification for Roe than the sterile-sounding "due process clause.
This quote from Sen. Dianne Feinstein about her Republican colleague Rick Santorum would seem to indicate otherwise: The Senator has talked about the liberty clause.
Wade, yes, did come from the liberty clause of the due process clause of the 14th amendment and other parts of the Constitution. For Feinstein, the "liberty clause" is evidently a subset of the "due process clause," which in turn is a subset of the Fourteenth Amendment.
So perhaps for some users of the phrase, "liberty clause" does indeed refer to the single word liberty! Sean Barrett suggests "unpacking" the due process clause into three components mini-clauses?
I do believe that this approaches what Feinstein, for instance, is implying with her use of "liberty clause" as a proper subset of the "due process clause.
George points out, shouldn't there then be a "life clause" and "property clause" accompanying the "liberty clause"? Of course, "life" and "property" have not been subject to the contentious reading that "liberty" has in Roe and other cases, so those two elements fade to the background.
I prefer thinking of this as a case of synechdoche, where the "liberty" element takes on the greatest significance in the clause and thus names it, even outstripping the "due process" that would normally have the greatest legalistic impact.
But here is Sen. Orrin Hatch using the same phrasing during the Clarence Thomas hearings in As you know, the first substantive due process case was the Dred Scott case in That is where the Supreme Court held that the "Liberty Clause" of the Due Process Clause prevented Congress from forbidding slavery in the territories. Hatch, by the way, is certainly no pro-choicer; rather, his use of "liberty clause" may have been somewhat ironic, perhaps hinting that he believes the appeal to a constitutional right to "liberty" was applied illiberally in Roe, just as it was in the Dred Scott case.
For more on how pro-life conservatives use Dred Scott as a code for talking about their opposition to Roe, see this piece by Timothy Noah on Slate. John O'Neil points out an obvious problem with Hatch's use of "liberty clause" or my initial interpretation of it: The right to substantive due process at issue in Dred Scott derives from the Fifth Amendment "No person shall This is also commonly referred to as a "due process clause" and is the obvious model for the similar passage in the Fourteenth Amendment, which applied due process restrictions to the states.
Hatch seems to be on his own, though, in using the phrase "liberty clause" in reference to the Fifth Amendment rather than the Fourteenth. Google Print went live today, and so I'd like to be among? As a first try, I thought I'd check to see if I could find someone using "hone in on" before George Plimpton did it in , and bingo: Whether it will actually help us hone in on the perpetrators or not, I don't know.
But it's worth a try. But no -- I've been misled by poor quality control at the source: It's not clear to me how it got entered in the Google Print database with a "Publication Date" of -- this is not a likely OCR or keyboarding error, and we can't blame it on MSWord's spellchecker.
I tried searching Google Print for "home in on", but the earliest examples available there so far are from In fact, I still believe that "home in on" was a WWII-era coinage, and that "hone in on" quickly appeared as an eggcorn for it, but the evidence for this view is just as unclear as it was before.
They had left the station on all night so we could "home in" on its frequency. Ben Zimmer reports that Looks like Google Print has a large number of books with a spurious pub date of Searching on that year will only return the first 50 matches too bad! And Michael Cramer points out that Amazon. Google Print and Amazon.
Probably there's a source in common, but I wonder what it is? Google and Amazon are frequent partners when you search on Amazon, you're using Google so it's not surprising for them to have a common data source.
However, in this case they probably bought the same bad data separately; Amazon's worst data comes direct from Books In Print, which is the major holder of this sort of data, and the obvious perhaps only place for Google to have gotten it.
As far as I can tell, they have an effective monopoly and the sort of quality control that comes with it. Not that I'm bitter about having the editor listed as the sole author of my book, or anything. Posted by Bill Poser at In an internal memorandum, Microsoft employees were told not to use the term Dzongkha in any Microsoft software, language lists or promotional materials since "Doing so implies affiliation with the Dalai Lama, which is not acceptable to the government of China.
In this instance, replace "Dzongkha" with 'Tibetan - Bhutan'. It didn't cost Microsoft a penny. Bhutan should have spent its money on free software. It would probably have been much cheaper, and they would have control over it. It simply isn't true that Dzongkha is a dialect of Tibetan in the sense in which dialect is usually used.
It isn't particularly closely related. There's more information about Dzongkha at the Himalayan Languages Project. The Ethnologue provides this family tree. Nor is there any relationship between Dzongkha and the Dalai Lama. A reader's comment on the Pinyin News post on this topic contains this explanation by Dr. Tibetan, however, belongs to a distinct sub-branch and is a Central Bodish language. The word rDzong pronounced Dzong denotes the citadels which served as the centres of military power and higher learning throughout Bhutan since the mediaeval period.
The word rDzong has nothing to do with the name Tsong-kha-pa, literally "man from the onion district" , who founded the dGe-lugs-pa pronounced Gelukpa or Gelup school of Tibetan Buddhism currently headed by the Dalai Lama.
Why is it that China would object to a term that they mistakenly associate with the Dalai Lama , one of the great men in the world today, recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize? It is because as head of the legitimate government of Tibet he is the symbol of Tibetan resistance to the colonial rule initiated by the Chinese invasion of In other words, Microsoft is refusing to recognize the existence of the national language of Bhutan so as not to offend China's sensibilities over its colonization of Tibet.
Now, I know from previous experience that I'm going to get outraged email and comments elsewhere from apologists for colonialism complaining that I don't know what I'm talking about, that Tibet has been part of China for thousands of years, that when China invaded in it was merely repossessing a part of China, and that Tibetans are much better off under enlightened Chinese rule, so I'll say a few words about this issue here in an attempt to forestall this.
If you're not familiar with it, you can get a good idea of the Chinese government's position here. Some of the arguments might be valid if the underlying facts were true, but others are simply infantile. One argument is that prior to the Chinese invasion Tibet was an oppressive, feudal society.
That was, in many ways true, but it hardly justifies colonization. Here's an identical argument: The European powers would therefore have been justified in invading China and incorporating it permanently into their countries. The people who take the opposite view include the Nobel Prize Committee. Here are a couple of excerpts from the Dalai Lama's Nobel Prize citation , with my emphasis added:
The people who take the opposite view include the Nobel Prize Committee. Anger has driven the English to achievement and greatness in a bewildering pantheon of disciplines. Time reports that "clerks and associates say the comparison [of Alito to Scalia], often made with the derisive nickname of 'Scalito,' does a disservice to the man. These languages have an aspiration contrast.