Linguistics

[tapu]

Thanks, Claudi! But... now I've watched god-knows how many hours of video about this case... and I'm not done!

I will say that after all that, I have some idea about which theory/scenario I'm inclined toward. However, I could never be fully committed to a belief about who did it unless I saw the evidence presented in court. Nonetheless, I have a leaning now.

Edited to add: I will keep checking in with myself about my impartiality, and right now I think I can set aside this leaning. It really is only that. So... we'll see.

Looks like my linguistic source up there (el Sombrero) has something for me.... If I don't respond right away, I am probably just thinking about it.

 

[madeleine]

Hotyh,was just reading the JR/S.Mills depo and came across this:

Q. Do you remember what countries you visited






--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Page 13




1 during that time?


2 A. We visited Japan, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Thailand.


3 I think that was it.


4 Q. Were you required to maintain a security


5 clearance?


6 A. Yes.


7 Q. What level of security clearance did you have?


8 A. Top secret.

----

I remember you said once that the SFF could be asian (if I remember correctly).Do you think it might be related to what JR did back then?

 

[tapu]

Anyway I have a couple of big exemplars but I'm waiting for some better criteria before going thru them. Is repetition and legal terms considered a linguistic match? What about grammatical errors? Does the ransom note have any? What about unique sentence structure patterns? Are there any of those in the ransom note? If the exemplars have the word victory in them a lot, does that mean anything?

I am interested in re-examining the note for the features you list other than "Victory." I don't think its appearance here would indicate its favored usage in the author's other speaking or writing. That said, if you've got examples with "Victory!" in them, I would reconsider.

I think the word being at end of RN speaks to one intention of the note--to sound like its from a small political group. I see someone who grew up in the Patty Hearst kidnapping days adding something they think the SLA might write. (I'm not saying that particular historical memory triggered the details in the RN; just giving an idea of how that may have come to mind when the author was concentrating on that strand of their multiple, varied ambiguous intentions.

btw, What do you mean when you say you have some "big exemplars"?

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

I am interested in re-examining the note for the features you list other than "Victory." I don't think its appearance here would indicate its favored usage in the author's other speaking or writing. That said, if you've got examples with "Victory!" in them, I would reconsider.

I think the word being at end of RN speaks to one intention of the note--to sound like its from a small political group. I see someone who grew up in the Patty Hearst kidnapping days adding something they think the SLA might write. (I'm not saying that particular historical memory triggered the details in the RN; just giving an idea of how that may have come to mind when the author was concentrating on that strand of their multiple, varied ambiguous intentions.

btw, What do you mean when you say you have some "big exemplars"?

Big in volume of text. I have one exemplar of over 120,000 words that I've partially read. Another exemplar of similar size I haven't read yet.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

I am interested in re-examining the note for the features you list other than "Victory." I don't think its appearance here would indicate its favored usage in the author's other speaking or writing. That said, if you've got examples with "Victory!" in them, I would reconsider.

I think the word being at end of RN speaks to one intention of the note--to sound like its from a small political group. I see someone who grew up in the Patty Hearst kidnapping days adding something they think the SLA might write. (I'm not saying that particular historical memory triggered the details in the RN; just giving an idea of how that may have come to mind when the author was concentrating on that strand of their multiple, varied ambiguous intentions.

It is impossible to know what all the intentions were or whether or not they were met. Judging from JBR's injuries, the weapons, and the fact that nobody in the house was ever disturbed, its possible that the multiple varied intentions were not ambiguous except to us. IOW just because WE dont understand it doesn't mean THEY didnt.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Hotyh,was just reading the JR/S.Mills depo and came across this:

Q. Do you remember what countries you visited






--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Page 13




1 during that time?


2 A. We visited Japan, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Thailand.


3 I think that was it.


4 Q. Were you required to maintain a security


5 clearance?


6 A. Yes.


7 Q. What level of security clearance did you have?


8 A. Top secret.

----

I remember you said once that the SFF could be asian (if I remember correctly).Do you think it might be related to what JR did back then?

I've never read this deposition. I thought he sold his wares mainly in Europe.

Of course it might be related, and it would help to know what he was doing/selling esp. Hong Kong and Thailand. Who his 'top secret' customers were.

 

[madeleine]

It's about the time he was in the navy.
Here's the link if you're interested.

http://web.dailycamera.com/extra/ramsey/2000/0206deposition.html

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

It's about the time he was in the navy.
Here's the link if you're interested.

http://web.dailycamera.com/extra/ramsey/2000/0206deposition.html

I doubt its related then. I thought that was more recent AG stuff.

 

[tapu]

Big in volume of text. I have one exemplar of over 120,000 words that I've partially read. Another exemplar of similar size I haven't read yet.

Exemplars of...?? Are you saying that you have suspects' representative, unsolicited writings from before the event? Which suspects'?

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Exemplars of...?? Are you saying that you have suspects' representative, unsolicited writings from before the event? Which suspects'?

representative? mostly, but its possible they were edited or proofread as they are published works.
unsolicited? yes, because they are from before the event.
Which suspects? quoting the theory rules:

NB -- Do not name any private individuals (i.e. give them a pseudonym).

 

[tapu]

Hat, what's with all the intrigue? Why would you not just put out there what you think you may have and let others look into it?

I would say that, otherwise, this particular thread is at the end of its pursuit.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Hat, what's with all the intrigue? Why would you not just put out there what you think you may have and let others look into it?

I would say that, otherwise, this particular thread is at the end of its pursuit.

I'm not that intrigued. Are you? Not unlike other posters, I have a theory and it has a suspect but forum rules say use a pseudonym.

Its just that 'repetitveness' and 'legal wording' is pretty common and doesn't make for a very big linguistic signature to use as criteria. There was another thread on linguistics that I'll bump up because I think it had quotes from a linguistic professor on this case.

 

[tapu]

By intrigue, I meant....

So, my question was, how come I can't see at least excerpts of these exemplars? I don't even want to know whose writing they are. Matter of fact, I'd prefer not to.

Straight answer, please. The straightest of which would be: "Okay, here are some excerpts..."


Thanks! I am looking forward to it.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

By intrigue, I meant....

So, my question was, how come I can't see at least excerpts of these exemplars? I don't even want to know whose writing they are. Matter of fact, I'd prefer not to.

Straight answer, please. The straightest of which would be: "Okay, here are some excerpts..."


Thanks! I am looking forward to it.

Here's a straight answer: I can't seem to copy and paste excerpts and protect the author at the same time. Innocent until proven guilty and all that.

I can give you numbers, though. If you provide one or more criteria I'll return the number of occurences within the text. That should be good enough because McM used a test like this to compare PR's exemplars with the ransom note.

 

[tragco]

Here's a straight answer: I can't seem to copy and paste excerpts and protect the author at the same time. Innocent until proven guilty and all that.

I can give you numbers, though. If you provide one or more criteria I'll return the number of occurences within the text. That should be good enough because McM used a test like this to compare PR's exemplars with the ransom note.

Can't you just black the author's name out? This sounds very interesting.

 

[tapu]

Did Dr. Seuss write it?? :waitasec: How would we be able to guess the author??

As for your last paragraph, Hat: that suggestion just sounds nuts to me. It is possible that I do not understand what you are saying, though. How would you count the occurrences of understatement, for example?

Anyway, decide now if you have anything to contribute so that we can stop cajoling you. Sheesh.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Can't you just black the author's name out? This sounds very interesting.

Anybody can simply do a google search on the text and bingo there is the author. I'll have no part of that because its wrong. It seems to be OK to name PR or JR (note I use pseudonyms myself).

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Did Dr. Seuss write it?? :waitasec: How would we be able to guess the author??

As for your last paragraph, Hat: that suggestion just sounds nuts to me. It is possible that I do not understand what you are saying, though. How would you count the occurrences of understatement, for example?

Anyway, decide now if you have anything to contribute so that we can stop cajoling you. Sheesh.

Dangerous Days by Mary Roberts Rinehart was written in 1919 and is about crime. It could be used as a baseline for this other exemplar because its roughly the same size. IOW find some criteria, I'll look it up in both and return the number of occurences in each.

Your idea that I'm going to name a real person and implicate them in a child murder is far more absurd than your idea of Dr. Seuss.

 

[tapu]

If the piece is published on the internet, as you imply, then excerpts are permissible. Practically anything is permissible, in fact, as long as you don't intend to make money off it.

PR and JR are, arguably, public personas now. So we can name them. Other potential suspects are considered private persons and cannot be named here. However, it doesn't count if you post writing excepts and someone else goes and looks up who it is.


edit: regarding your immediately previous post, you are the only person to suggest this person as a suspect?? if so, well.... knock yourself out with that. if not, then you are not "implicating" them in a crime. Actually, you aren't anyway.

 

[tapu]

Hat: "
Your idea that I'm going to name a real person and implicate them in a child murder is far more absurd than your idea of Dr. Seuss."

But the Seuss one was damn funny!