{
  "export": {
    "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/422",
    "note": "Exported from an unofficial mirror of a public mailing list. Copyright in each message remains with the person who wrote it.  Email addresses are obscured as `user at host`, the form the original archive published. This file was rebuilt from parsed fields rather than retained headers, so it is faithful in content but not byte-exact.",
    "addresses": "obscured as 'user at host'"
  },
  "archive": "urth",
  "thread": {
    "id": 422,
    "subject": "Hethor's Talk",
    "messages": 3,
    "voices": 3,
    "first": "1998-03-17T04:48:00+00:00",
    "last": "1998-03-17T20:25:38+00:00"
  },
  "messages": [
    {
      "message_id": "<urth-v0008-0634@digest.urth.net>",
      "from": {
        "name": "m.driussi",
        "address": "m.driussi at genie.geis.com"
      },
      "date": "1998-03-17T04:48:00+00:00",
      "subject": "(urth) Hethor's Talk",
      "in_reply_to": null,
      "reply_link": null,
      "blocks": [
        {
          "kind": "text",
          "depth": 0,
          "text": "Reply:  Item #1807114 from URTH at LISTS.BEST.COM@INET02#\n\nChristopher,\n\nBy writing that Hethor's most information rich (including links to\nour time rather than Severian's time) speech act was in Severian's\ndream rather than a witnessed event of \"real life\" I only meant to\ngently point to where it might be found--you seem to have been looking\nin the wrong place (volume I).\n\nAs for Korean, I'm hardly arguing with you--I'm on record as saying\nthat it is Chinese (1994).\n\n=mantis="
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "message_id": "<urth-v0008-0637@digest.urth.net>",
      "from": {
        "name": "C R Culver",
        "address": "crculver at aol.com"
      },
      "date": "1998-03-17T20:25:38+00:00",
      "subject": "Re:  (urth) Hethor's Talk",
      "in_reply_to": "<urth-v0008-0634@digest.urth.net>",
      "reply_link": "subject",
      "blocks": [
        {
          "kind": "quote",
          "depth": 1,
          "text": "I only meant to gently point to where it might be found--you seem to have\nbeen looking in the wrong place (volume I).<"
        },
        {
          "kind": "text",
          "depth": 0,
          "text": "Forget that whole letter. I was writing late at night, where the words\n\"Hethor\" and \"Jonas\" begin to look the same. Nevermind me."
        },
        {
          "kind": "quote",
          "depth": 1,
          "text": "As for Korean, I'm hardly arguing with you--I'm on record as saying\nthat it is Chinese<"
        },
        {
          "kind": "text",
          "depth": 0,
          "text": "My reason that I reject Chinese is because Sev doesn't seem to mention tones,\nwhich are present in Chinese but absent in Korean. Both are, however, nasal\nmonosyllabic tongues.\n\nChristopher R. Culver <crculver at aol.com>\nhttp://members.aol.com/crculver/index.html"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "message_id": "<urth-v0008-0641@digest.urth.net>",
      "from": {
        "name": "Mark Millman",
        "address": "mark_millman at hmco.com"
      },
      "date": "1998-03-17T15:43:51+00:00",
      "subject": "Re: (urth) Hethor's Talk",
      "in_reply_to": "<urth-v0008-0637@digest.urth.net>",
      "reply_link": "subject",
      "blocks": [
        {
          "kind": "quote",
          "depth": 2,
          "text": "mantis wrote:\nAs for Korean, I'm hardly arguing with you--I'm\non record as saying that it is Chinese"
        },
        {
          "kind": "text",
          "depth": 0,
          "text": "to which Christopher R. Culver replied:"
        },
        {
          "kind": "quote",
          "depth": 1,
          "text": "My reason that I reject Chinese is because Sev\ndoesn't seem to mention tones, which are present\nin Chinese but absent in Korean. Both are, however,\nnasal monosyllabic tongues."
        },
        {
          "kind": "text",
          "depth": 0,
          "text": "But Severian, since he doesn't speak Chinese, might well not notice the\ntones--they're not that obvious to non-speakers even in Cantonese, which is\nthe more heavily tonal of the two major dialects.  The tones could be\ninterpreted, especially by someone who doesn't speak a tonal language, as\nsimply the natural rhythms and inflections of speech in that tongue.  It's\ninteresting to note that Mandarin, which would, given the lack of state\nresources available to most Cantonese-speakers, seem to be more likely as\nthe language of a spacefaring culture, is more heavily nasal than\nCantonese--so much so that even those who don't speak Chinese can sometimes\ntell them apart by the sound.\n\nMark Millman"
        }
      ]
    }
  ]
}