Opening problems for AI: Problem 45

[Knotwilg]

The spelling with -re was popularized in Britain by Johnson's dictionary (following Bailey's), though -er is older and was used by Shakespeare

Well, Shakespeare couldn't even spell his own name consistently. And let us not forget that American spellings were popularised by a Scot.

Is this a test for the Dutch speakers, John?

Sorry, but I don't understand the question. I'm just observing that Dutch people seem particularly prone to loose usage of lose. I've seen it picked up on several other non-go forums, so it's not just me being picky.

It's not really that it irritates me. It's more of a fascination. Dutch people are generally so superb at English (and other languages) that to see this blindspot over and over again makes me wonder what is going on. The irritation I feel is that, even as a linguist, I don't understand how it comes about. (The only other constant hiccup I can think of by Dutch people is "an applause". This is one of Andre Rieu's solecisms, who overuse of it makes me cringe, even though he is otherwise one of my favourite entertainers. But at least I can see where it comes from.)

I was just mocking your then/than mistake (in bold)

I beg to differ about the Dutch excellence at other languages. I've rather been awestruck by the Swedes in that regard, their fellow Scandinavians (a word they all hate) and likewise by Russians, Iranians (?), Syrians and in general people from the Middle East. I'm also making a modest case for us, Belgian Dutch speakers, who have been squeezed between and ruled by so many different cultures that we've become accustomed to acquire them. The Dutch have good command of English and German but we're more into the Roman languages - if I can be so awfully generalizing.

As to "loose/lose" - it continues to baffle me too how such an easy mistake is so stubborn to cure. In our region, which I praised a moment ago, there are other seemingly incurable errors, like the pronunciation of the verb "to interpret" (said: in-ter-PREET) or "to determine" (DEE-ter-mine, where mine is pronounced like the possessive).

And thanks for "an applause": it's something I didn't know to be wrong. Only recently I unlearned the phrase "according to me" after a native speaker had pointed it out as a rather awkward thing to say.

Cheers!

[Bill Spight]

Only recently I unlearned the phrase "according to me" after a native speaker had pointed it out as a rather awkward thing to say.

We ain't just gonna keep on playin' this game accordin' to Mister Hoylee.
We gon' play this game accordin' to me!

[John Fairbairn]

Bill

You mentioned Johnson's dictionary. He had a few notable opponents in Scotland, but the most notable was Robert Fergusson, who was a forerunner of Burns in writing Scots poetry. He is most famous for his "Ode to the Gowdspink" (the goldfinch) but he could match Johnson in both "normal" English and sarcasm. It took me a while to dig it out, but I think it was worth the time as you are one of the few here that might appreciate it. Note that it's (ostensibly) English but I see it got at least as many wavy wed lines from the spell checker as did To a Mouse.

There's a sly joke in the last line. You're not supposed to pronounce the final 'd' in Loch Lomond. Presumably Johnson did.

‘To Dr Samuel Johnson: Food for a New Edition of His Dictionary’
Robert Fergusson

Great Pedagogue! whose literarian lore,
With syllable on syllable conjoined,
To transmutate and varify, hast learned
The whole revolving scientific names
That in the alphabetic columns lie,
Far from the knowledge of mortalic shapes;
As we, who never can peroculate
The miracles by thee miraculized,
The Muse, silential long, with mouth apert,
Would give vibration to stagnatic tongue,
And loud encomiate thy puissant name,
Eulogiated from the green decline
Of Thames’s banks to Scoticanian shores,
Where Lochlomondian liquids undulize.

[dhu163]

Speculatively:
Current position:
1. Upper left is open. I can't understand why that isn't the biggest. So I would like to take sente at the least with b. This makes W heavier behind B's line and also helps B work with a move in the upper left, preventing W sacrifice stones too deep in B's area. c isn't even necessarily sente. I'm not sure why that is there. hmm, I guess it is probably around 30 points to live, so I guess it is sente. In that case, I think a is the worst of the options.

Opp to play
1. Even first to play L17 seems risky after K15 but perhaps it is still better than K15. Not sure though.

Past:
1. Why did W even start the fight in the upper right moyo when the upper left was open? Presumably enticed by the space due to the low and small R15 and the O8 cut. I can't approve though. There is not much aji on R15. And O8 is locally a net. With the big lower right corner, this position feels as though it should be much better for W. B's several extra centre stones don't seem to be doing anything. W has around 48 pts there. On the other hand I'd say B has around 3 stones worth in the upper right and 1 in the lower left, with sente. That should be theoretically around 63 stones. Probably W living in the centre reduces this more than this estimate otherwise it would be too good for B. It seems that I have underestimated how many moves W spend on the lower side. Perhaps B really is better. Ah, but I was using territory counting for one and stone counting for the other, so that is probably the main reason for the discrepancy.

Check:
1. I think c is like a probe. There isn't much there beyond making a very large ko threat.