alt.usage.english http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english?hl=en
[email protected] Today's topics: * Egg cups - 3 messages, 3 authors http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/b8f6a685018199ee?hl=en * Haiku, a 17-syllable form of Japanese poetry, - 4 messages, 4 authors http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/c5759c595f94350c?hl=en * Wonk - 4 messages, 4 authors http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/8ad29441a4593119?hl=en * Hot dogs and onions - 2 messages, 2 authors http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/475fb750586c9e76?hl=en * Supermarket research - 1 messages, 1 author http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/f350e3f6795ecd33?hl=en * Names of the schools - 2 messages, 2 authors http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/b61ad7ccf8dc373d?hl=en * The New York Times - 2 messages, 2 authors http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/ea67a522eab4f2a6?hl=en * Tailgating - 2 messages, 2 authors http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/991f3e4866805238?hl=en * Lovemaking tips for Seniors - 2 messages, 2 authors http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/b5f4f26559e7e685?hl=en * Wish I may, Wish I might - 1 messages, 1 author http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/2f823132734a494a?hl=en * Does sarcasm work both ways? - 1 messages, 1 author http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/32381070ebacb851?hl=en * Intentional Concussions Considered Harmful? - 1 messages, 1 author http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/86bd25162d20e0c0?hl=en ============================================================================== TOPIC: Egg cups http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/b8f6a685018199ee?hl=en ============================================================================== == 1 of 3 == Date: Sat, Nov 21 2009 2:51 pm From: [email protected] (Garrett Wollman) In article <[email protected]>, erilar <[email protected]> wrote: >In article <[email protected]>, > [email protected] (Garrett Wollman) wrote: > >> The more traditional sweet starch-thickened custard-like >> dairy dessert is known by the retronym "cooked pudding". > >I think that's what we called "cornstarch pudding" when I was a child. I >later found something that looked like the same recipe called "blanc >mange". I pointed out the AmE sense to Margot Charlton at OUP; she noted likewise and put it in the OED3 revision file. FWIW, the first edition of /Joy/ had an entire page in its index devoted to puddings (older BrE sense). The most recent edition talks about what most Americans know as "pudding" under the heading "Cornstarch puddings" (which itself goes back to that first edition), but devotes only a couple of inches in its index to "puddings". So "pudding" clearly meant something broader to Mrs. Rombauer than it does to me. -GAWollman -- Garrett A. Wollman | What intellectual phenomenon can be older, or more oft [email protected]| repeated, than the story of a large research program Opinions not shared by| that impaled itself upon a false central assumption my employers. | accepted by all practitioners? - S.J. Gould, 1993 == 2 of 3 == Date: Sat, Nov 21 2009 2:59 pm From: James Hogg James Silverton wrote: > Amethyst wrote on Sat, 21 Nov 2009 21:20:26 +0000: > >>> Steve Hayes wrote >>> >>>> On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 15:30:36 +1100, Richard Bollard >>>> <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> We call it "fried bread" or "fried bread and bacon". >>>>> Somebody once told me it was a species of French toast so I >>>>> looked that up and couldn't cope with the idea of the >>>>> sugar. >>>>> >>>>> I have on occasion put a dash of ketchup on a fried egg but >>>>> I just can't imagine putting any on fried bread. >>>> >>>> When a slice of bread is fried after being dipped in egg, we >>>> call it "French toast". >>> >>> I evidently had a sheltered upbringing in Warwickshire[1] and >>> never came across it before moving up to Leeds. "Eggy Bread" they >>> call it in Yorkshire. To save brass, we add a little >>> water to the beaten egg (with a little salt and pepper), >>> before immersing the bread in it and frying the result. The >>> water, not too much of it, allows you to make an extra >>> half-slice fom the one egg. > >> It was eggy bread when I was growing up, in Watford - parents from the >> north-east and from London. It was also the common >> name for it in Guides. > >>> Eggy bread is also a delicious carbohydrate portion as an >>> accompaniment to a salad in summer. > >> It was eggy bread when I was growing up, in Watford - parents from the >> north-east and from London. It was also the common name for it in >> Guides. > > It seems to be called egg bread in Utah too. Known in ninth-century Wessex as Ecgbriht. -- James == 3 of 3 == Date: Sat, Nov 21 2009 3:16 pm From: Cheryl erilar wrote: > In article <[email protected]>, > Cheryl <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I know that Europeans often have odd names >> for our local berries (and I'm sure they think the reverse). The two >> most common ones are our bakeapples (cloudberries?)and partridgeberries >> (lingonberries?), but I was pretty sure that any berry with 'cow' in the >> name probably didn't grow in same sort of area as bakeapples do. > > I've been wondering as assorted berries were being discussed: are any > of them the same as chokecherries? I remember picking them from tall > bushes along the road for Mom to make jelly of. I liked it better than > apple jelly, but that's all I recall about it. > No, they're all pretty small plants. Squashberries, which I don't think have come up yet, grow on taller bushes I believe (I've never actually picked any, but squashberry jelly is delicious), but they aren't the same thing as chokecherries. -- Cheryl ============================================================================== TOPIC: Haiku, a 17-syllable form of Japanese poetry, http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/c5759c595f94350c?hl=en ============================================================================== == 1 of 4 == Date: Sat, Nov 21 2009 3:03 pm From: James Hogg Robin Bignall wrote: > On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 13:44:17 -0800, "Skitt" <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Robert Lieblich wrote: >>> James Hogg wrote: >>>> Robert Lieblich wrote: >>>>> Donna Richoux wrote: >>>>>> Pining for the fjords Joined the choir invisible Pushing up >>>>>> daisies. >>>>> You may not have realized there was a contest, Donna. But there >>>>> was. And I concede. >>>> Kidney for breakfast >>>> June sixteenth, nineteen-o-four >>>> I said yes I will >>> We may have to award many trophies here. >> More than one trophy? >> My chances are increasing. >> Maybe this winter ... > > Questions disappear > SDC impossible > The sheep are dying Sheep burned, kids killed too; Naked but for all these boils: Blessed be the Lord. -- James == 2 of 4 == Date: Sat, Nov 21 2009 3:04 pm From: "James Silverton" Roland wrote on Sat, 21 Nov 2009 21:34:29 +0000 (UTC): >> Robert Lieblich wrote: >>> Donna Richoux wrote: >>> >>> [ ... ] >>> >>>> Pining for the fjords Joined the choir invisible Pushing up >>>> daisies. >>> >>> You may not have realized there was a contest, Donna. But >>> there was. And I concede. >> >> Kidney for breakfast >> June sixteenth, nineteen-o-four >> I said yes I will > Definitely competition-quality--not that we'd expect anything > less of its author! According to the Haiku Handbook by William L Higginson, the definition of a haiku as a seventeen syllable poem in three lines is rather a simplistic trap since Japanese don't count syllables but onji or "sound symbols".. For instance Basho's poem furuike ya old pond.... kawzu tobikomu a frog leaps in mizu no oto water's sound This seems a pretty good haiku in Japanese or English tho' I can't pass judgement on the Japanese. -- James Silverton Potomac, Maryland Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not == 3 of 4 == Date: Sat, Nov 21 2009 5:29 pm From: RichardMaurer And in the 7-11-7 category Commas and dashes and ems For whom English is not Latin, nor static Clarity and accuracy -- --------------------------------------------- Richard Maurer To reply, remove half Sunnyvale, California of a homonym of a synonym for also. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- == 4 of 4 == Date: Sat, Nov 21 2009 5:53 pm From: Roland Hutchinson On Sun, 22 Nov 2009 00:03:06 +0100, James Hogg wrote: > Robin Bignall wrote: >> On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 13:44:17 -0800, "Skitt" <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Robert Lieblich wrote: >>>> James Hogg wrote: >>>>> Robert Lieblich wrote: >>>>>> Donna Richoux wrote: >>>>>>> Pining for the fjords Joined the choir invisible Pushing up >>>>>>> daisies. >>>>>> You may not have realized there was a contest, Donna. But there >>>>>> was. And I concede. >>>>> Kidney for breakfast >>>>> June sixteenth, nineteen-o-four >>>>> I said yes I will >>>> We may have to award many trophies here. >>> More than one trophy? >>> My chances are increasing. >>> Maybe this winter ... >> >> Questions disappear >> SDC impossible >> The sheep are dying > > Sheep burned, kids killed too; > Naked but for all these boils: > Blessed be the Lord. God's will scrutinized in seventeen syllables: Hogg is on the Job. -- Roland Hutchinson He calls himself "the Garden State's leading violist da gamba," ... comparable to being ruler of an exceptionally small duchy. --Newark (NJ) Star Ledger ( http://tinyurl.com/RolandIsNJ ) ============================================================================== TOPIC: Wonk http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/8ad29441a4593119?hl=en ============================================================================== == 1 of 4 == Date: Sat, Nov 21 2009 3:03 pm From: "Peter Duncanson (BrE)" On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 22:31:49 +0000 (GMT), [email protected] wrote: >In article <[email protected]>, >Richard Chambers <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>The interesting finding is that practically all the respondents from North >>America already knew what it meant. Only a few of the British respondents >>knew it. An interesting exception to Chambers's Law has occurred. This Law >>states:- > >Just as a data point, I have been familiar with it for years, and I thought a >few other Brits had said the same (Laura, for one). Did you have >that many Brit respondents who didn't? > >I bet the other Katy knew it. > I've been trying to remember whether "policy wonk" was used in _The West Wing_. I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't. -- Peter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) == 2 of 4 == Date: Sat, Nov 21 2009 4:26 pm From: "John Dean" Peter Duncanson (BrE) wrote: > On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 22:31:49 +0000 (GMT), [email protected] wrote: > >> In article <[email protected]>, >> Richard Chambers <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> The interesting finding is that practically all the respondents >>> from North America already knew what it meant. Only a few of the >>> British respondents knew it. An interesting exception to Chambers's >>> Law has occurred. This Law states:- >> >> Just as a data point, I have been familiar with it for years, and I >> thought a few other Brits had said the same (Laura, for one). Did >> you have >> that many Brit respondents who didn't? >> >> I bet the other Katy knew it. >> > I've been trying to remember whether "policy wonk" was used in _The > West Wing_. I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't. A quick search of such transcripts as are at http://communicationsoffice.tripod.com/index1.html suggests it wasn't. I, too, am surprised at Richard's assertion that only a few Brits knew it. I thought the majority of Brit postings indicated we did, and an average use in the Guardian of around twice a week ought to be a further indicator that it's known here. And those Brits who *didn't* post may well have known it but decided to play safe and follow Richard's 'no posting if you know' policy. -- John Dean Oxford == 3 of 4 == Date: Sat, Nov 21 2009 4:52 pm From: "John Holmes" Richard Chambers wrote: > A little experiment:- > What I would like you to do, if like me you have never heard of "wonk" > before, is to reply with your own definition of the word, based on > total ignorance. Together with why you think that might be the > meaning of the word. Please do not reply if you already know the > word. While you're at it, you might like also to define > "name-checking". These are my first impressions, without knowing the full context of the article or looking anything up: "wonk" - noun backformed from "wonky", something broken, dubious, unreliable. "name-checking" - looking up names in a directory or reference of some sort. -- Regards John for mail: my initials plus a u e at tpg dot com dot au == 4 of 4 == Date: Sat, Nov 21 2009 5:57 pm From: "Frank ess" Richard Chambers wrote: > From page 2 of of the Sunday Times Supplement, 15 November, under > the title "There's some smart thinking in Cameron's simple vision > of the Big Society":- > > "[...] Cameron did this by name-checking no fewer than 15 > intellectuals and thinkers -- some dead, some Labour, most > American. Recently, Tory wonks, orchestrated by Steve Hilton, > strategy director, have been calling on startled academics and > asking them what they have been thinking lately [...]". > > I had never heard of a "wonk" before. The definition (but please do > not click on it immediately) is:- > > http://www.thefreedictionary.com/wonk (Not yet, please). > > A little experiment:- > What I would like you to do, if like me you have never heard of > "wonk" before, is to reply with your own definition of the word, > based on total ignorance. Together with why you think that might be > the meaning of the word. Please do not reply if you already know > the word. While you're at it, you might like also to define > "name-checking". > The object of the experiment is to determine how much we understand > of the latest buzz-words that are thrown at us. > > My own contribution to this experiment will follow in a separate > posting. > Richard Chambers Leeds UK. Somone who is immersed in some aspect of a field, to the exclusion of pretty much everything else. "Policy wonks" may have gotten us into the sad shape we're in. Whiff of chocolate here? -- Frank ess ============================================================================== TOPIC: Hot dogs and onions http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/475fb750586c9e76?hl=en ============================================================================== == 1 of 2 == Date: Sat, Nov 21 2009 3:05 pm From: [email protected] (Mark Brader) "David": > What's a primal? A numeral divisibal only by itself and one-all. What's a ball? -- Mark Brader, Toronto | "Canadian seals deal with creditors" [email protected] | --Globe & Mail, Toronto, July 1, 1997 == 2 of 2 == Date: Sat, Nov 21 2009 3:06 pm From: [email protected] (Garrett Wollman) In article <[email protected]>, the Omrud <[email protected]> wrote: >What's a primal? One of the large pieces of meat (and bone and fat and connective tissue) into which critters are disassembled by meatpackers for sale to butchers. (OED calls this sense "orig. and chiefly U.S." so it's not surprise that you did not know it.) The butcher then cuts up the primal into smaller retail cuts like steaks, chops, racks, and so on. For example, the short loin is a beef primal; depending on how it is sliced up by the butcher, it could be fabricated into porterhouse steaks, T-bones, or strip steaks. (Pigs have fewer primals than cattle, so there's just one "loin" primal instead of separate rib, short loin, tenderloin, and sirloin primals as on a steer.) -GAWollman -- Garrett A. Wollman | What intellectual phenomenon can be older, or more oft [email protected]| repeated, than the story of a large research program Opinions not shared by| that impaled itself upon a false central assumption my employers. | accepted by all practitioners? - S.J. Gould, 1993 ============================================================================== TOPIC: Supermarket research http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/f350e3f6795ecd33?hl=en ============================================================================== == 1 of 1 == Date: Sat, Nov 21 2009 3:09 pm From: "Frank ess" Evan Kirshenbaum wrote: > Reinhold {Rey} Aman <[email protected]> writes: > >> Evan Kirshenbaum wrote: >>> >>> Reinhold {Rey} Aman writes: >> [...] >>>> Speaking of which, do your Hispanic colleagues or visitors ever >>>> snicker about "HP"? >>> >>> Not that I've noticed. (About 20% or so of my lab at the moment >>> is Mexican.) What would it mean? >>> >> Son of a whore. "H.P." is the standard abbreviation and euphemized >> version of _*h*ijo de *p*uta_, also spoken as "ache pe." > > Ah. I should have guessed that. I'll have to ask whether the name > is considered snicker-worthy. > Ask about the FBI, as well. ============================================================================== TOPIC: Names of the schools http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/b61ad7ccf8dc373d?hl=en ============================================================================== == 1 of 2 == Date: Sat, Nov 21 2009 3:10 pm From: John Lawler On Nov 21, 1:25 pm, Robert Lieblich <[email protected]> wrote: > Mark Brader wrote: > > > Marius Hancu: > > > 1. These are the names of the schools whose students' parents should > > > fill in the forms. > > > > 2. These are the names of the schools the parents of whose students > > > should fill in the forms. > > > Both versions seem fine to me, except for "fill in". You fill *in* > > each individual blank in order to fill *out* the form. This may be > > different in Britain. > > > I would probably have written something like this: > > > Parents of students at the following schools should fill out the form: > > I agree that the suggested replacement is much better than either > choice offered by Marius, but I'd like to dissent from the approval of > suggested version 2. It's grammatical, if just barely, but it's also > obviously an attempt to repair something that ain't broke, to the > point where it might as well be a hypercorrection. It's a close > relative to sentences that displace adverbs to keep them from > "splitting" verb phrases, leading to such monstrosities as "The > Committee diligently shall investigate the proposed alternatives." > > Or, as H.W. Fowler more succinctly put it, there's nothing wrong with > "whose" inanimate. If you must choose between 1 and 2, Marius, cling > tightly to 1 and set 2 adrift. > > As for "fill in," I consider it natural and standard in American > English for the entire form as well as individual blanks. I think > this is yet another Pondian difference. > > -- > Bob Lieblich > And his Book of Nautical Metaphors Bob is right. The phenomenon at issue, which is the difference between ... the schools whose students' parents should ... and ... he schools the parents of whose students should ... is known as Pied Piping, and it works with relative clause formation, when the relative WH-word (here 'whose' because it's possessive, never mind that it's neuter) gets moved to the front of the clause. (The technical name for that part is WH-Fronting, by the way.) If the WH-word represents a word that's deep inside one or more prepositional phrases in the relative clause, one may optionally front the whole prepositional phrase that the WH-word is in to avoid stranding the preposition. Optionally. And one may also -- optionally -- front the head noun modified by that clause, along with the clause. And, recursively, if *that* head noun is *also* in a prepositional phrase, one may optionally do the same thing, again. Ad hoc, ad libitum, ad finitum. For example, this is the example sentence that Haj Ross gave in his 1967 dissertation on movement rules (in this case WH-fronting) operating over variables (in this case, the depth of prepositional phrases): The government specifies the height of the lettering on the covers of the reports. So, in a relative clause where 'reports' becomes the WH-word, the following variants are all more or less possible: the reports, which the government specifies the height of the lettering on the covers of the reports, of which the government specifies the height of the lettering on the covers the reports, the covers of which the government specifies the height of the lettering on the reports, on the covers of which the government specifies the height of the lettering the reports, the lettering on the covers of which the government specifies the height of the reports, of the lettering on the covers of which the government specifies the height the reports, the height of the lettering on the covers of which the government specifies Frankly, most of them are no easier to understand, nor are any of them any higher-faluting. Most of them, in fact, sound dumb; as Bob suggested, it's an attempt to repair something that ain't broke. About as useful as shouting "Expelliarmus!" at the end of the sentence. Neither grammar nor glamour (which is the same thing historically) really works that way. -John Lawler http://www.umich.edu/~jlawler People who used magic without knowing what they were doing usually came to a sticky end. All over the entire room, sometimes. -- Terry Pratchett, Moving Pictures == 2 of 2 == Date: Sat, Nov 21 2009 4:25 pm From: Marius Hancu On Nov 21, 6:10 pm, John Lawler <[email protected]> wrote: > On Nov 21, 1:25 pm, Robert Lieblich <[email protected]> wrote: > > Mark Brader wrote: > > > > Marius Hancu: > > > > 1. These are the names of the schools whose students' parents should > > > > fill in the forms. > > > > > 2. These are the names of the schools the parents of whose students > > > > should fill in the forms. > > > > Both versions seem fine to me, except for "fill in". You fill *in* > > > each individual blank in order to fill *out* the form. This may be > > > different in Britain. > > > > I would probably have written something like this: > > > > Parents of students at the following schools should fill out the form: > > > I agree that the suggested replacement is much better than either > > choice offered by Marius, but I'd like to dissent from the approval of > > suggested version 2. It's grammatical, if just barely, but it's also > > obviously an attempt to repair something that ain't broke, to the > > point where it might as well be a hypercorrection. It's a close > > relative to sentences that displace adverbs to keep them from > > "splitting" verb phrases, leading to such monstrosities as "The > > Committee diligently shall investigate the proposed alternatives." > > > Or, as H.W. Fowler more succinctly put it, there's nothing wrong with > > "whose" inanimate. If you must choose between 1 and 2, Marius, cling > > tightly to 1 and set 2 adrift. > > > As for "fill in," I consider it natural and standard in American > > English for the entire form as well as individual blanks. I think > > this is yet another Pondian difference. > > > -- > > Bob Lieblich > > And his Book of Nautical Metaphors > > Bob is right. The phenomenon at issue, which is the > difference between > > ... the schools whose students' parents should ... > and > ... he schools the parents of whose students should ... > > is known as Pied Piping, and it works with relative > clause formation, when the relative WH-word (here > 'whose' because it's possessive, never mind that > it's neuter) gets moved to the front of the clause. > (The technical name for that part is WH-Fronting, > by the way.) > > If the WH-word represents a word that's deep inside > one or more prepositional phrases in the relative clause, > one may optionally front the whole prepositional > phrase that the WH-word is in to avoid stranding the > preposition. Optionally. > > And one may also -- optionally -- front the head noun > modified by that clause, along with the clause. And, > recursively, if *that* head noun is *also* in a prepositional > phrase, one may optionally do the same thing, again. > Ad hoc, ad libitum, ad finitum. > > For example, this is the example sentence that Haj Ross > gave in his 1967 dissertation on movement rules (in > this case WH-fronting) operating over variables (in > this case, the depth of prepositional phrases): > > The government specifies > the height of > the lettering on > the covers of > the reports. > > So, in a relative clause where 'reports' becomes the > WH-word, the following variants are all more or less > possible: > > the reports, which the government specifies > the height of the lettering on the covers of > > the reports, of which the government specifies > the height of the lettering on the covers > > the reports, the covers of which the government > specifies the height of the lettering on > > the reports, on the covers of which the government > specifies the height of the lettering > > the reports, the lettering on the covers of which > the government specifies the height of > > the reports, of the lettering on the covers of which > the government specifies the height > > the reports, the height of the lettering on the covers > of which the government specifies > > Frankly, most of them are no easier to understand, nor > are any of them any higher-faluting. Most of them, in > fact, sound dumb; as Bob suggested, it's an attempt > to repair something that ain't broke. > > About as useful as shouting "Expelliarmus!" at the end > of the sentence. Neither grammar nor glamour (which > is the same thing historically) really works that way. > > -John Lawler http://www.umich.edu/~jlawler > People who used magic without knowing what they were > doing usually came to a sticky end. All over the entire > room, sometimes. -- Terry Pratchett, Moving Pictures Thank you, Professor Lawler. Thank you all. Marius Hancu ============================================================================== TOPIC: The New York Times http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/ea67a522eab4f2a6?hl=en ============================================================================== == 1 of 2 == Date: Sat, Nov 21 2009 3:17 pm From: [email protected] (Garrett Wollman) In article <[email protected]>, Roland Hutchinson <[email protected]> wrote: >Whereas I was taught out of a grammar book that insisted on "the New York >_Times_" (the last word only being in italics), "the St. Louis _Post- >Dispatch_", etc. Whereas I was taught to italicize the exact title given on the masthead; hence: /The New York Times/ /The Times/ (London) The /Contra Costa/ (Calif.) /Times/ In some citation styles, names of newspapers are not italicized. -GAWollman -- Garrett A. Wollman | What intellectual phenomenon can be older, or more oft [email protected]| repeated, than the story of a large research program Opinions not shared by| that impaled itself upon a false central assumption my employers. | accepted by all practitioners? - S.J. Gould, 1993 == 2 of 2 == Date: Sat, Nov 21 2009 3:57 pm From: John Lawler On Nov 21, 2:39 pm, Masa <[email protected]> wrote: > Sorry, I couldn't describe clearly what I wanted to ask. > My writing wasn't clear enough, so quite misleading, I've reflected. > It's always a challenge for me to put a question in English. > > What I wanted to say is as follows: > > The + (proper noun) like The (New York Times) > comes from the original form of The + (proper noun) + (common noun). > And the part of common noun has been abbreviated. > If this rules applies, the New York Times must have been > the + (New York Times) + (common noun) originally. > > If so, what would have been the word in the position of common noun? > > I guessed it might be the + (New York Times) + (newspaper). > > How do you say about this point? > Am I clear enough this time? No, it doesn't come from that original form. If someone has given you that idea, you should learn to mistrust their linguistic judgement. Proper nouns do not always have common nouns indicating their status or type. Rather, proper nouns are denotative by themselves. And here's the rule for use of 'the': There is no single rule for use of 'the'. Every situation has its own idiomatic rules for how articles should be used. This is particularly true when proper nouns are involved. So (* indicates ungrammatical): Lake Michigan ~ *The Lake Michigan Lake of the Woods ~ The Lake of the Woods *Great Salt Lake ~ The Great Salt Lake *The Salt Lake (City) ~ Salt Lake (City) The Mississippi River ~ *Mississippi River ...etc. The reason is that 'the' doesn't mean anything. It's available (like 'a/an', which means just as little) as a mark to distinguish some situations from others. Which situations? *Any* situations; custom will decide, and then one just follows custom. In the case of newspapers, custom says that the proper name of the newspaper (in italics if one prefers, since it's a title) can be stated either as The _<title>_ of _<place>_ (The Times of London) or as The _<place>_ _<title>_ (The New York Times) and that the category does not appear in the name: *The Times newspaper of London *The New York Times newspaper This rule applies to newspapers, not apple varieties, nor lakes, nor counties, nor ambassadors, nor any other variety of noun. They have their own rules, equally idiosyncratic. That's just the way grammar works. Is this hard to learn? Yes. Sorry about that. Are there any other questions? -John Lawler http://www.umich.edu/~jlawler/aue "Man acts as if he were the shaper and master of language, while it is language which remains the mistress of man." -- Martin Heidegger ============================================================================== TOPIC: Tailgating http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/991f3e4866805238?hl=en ============================================================================== == 1 of 2 == Date: Sat, Nov 21 2009 3:38 pm From: "Pat Durkin" "Hatunen" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]... > On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 00:48:21 +1100, Peter Moylan > <gro.naly...@retep> wrote: > >>Nick Spalding wrote: >>> Mike Page wrote, in <[email protected]> >>> on Fri, 20 Nov 2009 12:27:12 +0000: >>> >>>> James Hogg wrote: >>>>> Peter Moylan wrote: >>>>>> I've just received this in e-mail. >>>>>> >>>>>> "The N.F.L. is trying to crack down on the number of drunken >>>>>> fans by >>>>>> limiting tailgating to three and a half hours. Great idea! Now >>>>>> the fans >>>>>> will get drunk first and then drive to the stadium." >>>>>> >>>>>> I would have been completely bamboozled by that if it hadn't >>>>>> been for a >>>>>> recent thread in aue. OK. Now I understand it's about hanging >>>>>> around in >>>>>> a car park and finishing off the booze in the car boot. (Sorry, >>>>>> trunk. >>>>>> You say potato, etc.) Another step in my education. >>>>>> >>>>>> But is it really called "tailgating"? In my version of English, >>>>>> tailgating unambiguously means driving too close to the car in >>>>>> front >>>>>> of you. >>>>> Let me Wiki that for you: >>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tailgate_party >>>>> >>>>> (It was completely new to me too.) >>>>> >>>> And to me. We seem not to be dogging in the footsteps of the US >>>> on this one. >>> >>> It doesn't seem much different in kind from the quality picnicking >>> out >>> of the car boot at a point-to-point or for that matter at Ascot. >> >>Sure, but I'll bet that the Ascot picnickers don't call it >>tailgating. > > For non-left-pondians: tailgaiting in a stadium carpark is done > in advance of an athletic contest, > advance of the game and set out charcoal grills and cold-chests > of beer and lawn chairs and tables. There is a lot of back and > forth visiting and exchanging of food and beverages. A very merry > time is had by all, until the need to attend the game interrupts > the partying. There is a charming TV commercial (I have only seen it twice and can't tell you which product is being promoted...perhaps cable TV service?) out there nowadays. A bunch of men are trooping out the door, all muffled and toting something, (provisions and equipment, chairs, etc) shouting encouraging comments to each other: "Git 'r done", "Let's go champs", etc. Apparently there is a great bustle and to-do, with the final scene being four or five men's backs to the camera in a heavy snowfall as they all watch "the game", which is displayed on a fairly large color TV set perched on the tailgate of an SUV. I confess that the first sense I had was wondering if the guys were going hunting, for that is the season we have just entered upon, here in Wisconsin, but, no-o-o. == 2 of 2 == Date: Sat, Nov 21 2009 5:48 pm From: "Frank ess" the Omrud wrote: > Joe Fineman wrote: >> Peter Moylan <gro.naly...@retep> writes: >> >>> Another effective bumper sticker is "I slow down for tailgaters". >> >> In my long-gone cardriving days, I was tempted to make it "If you >> can read this, you are close enough to **** ** ***" -- but only >> tempted. I wonder why I have never seen, these days, a programmable >> LED >> bumper. Perhaps it's illegal. > > Not bumper, but such things exist for placement in the rear window. > In the UK at least, they can only show red lights, but otherwise I > believe they are legal. Just a start: http://www.kleargear.com/1904.html I have an 8x10-inch fluorescent-orange-on black sign in my car. I occasionally flash the NICE CAR side at another driver, but it's the LEFT LANE IS FOR PASSING side that gets kmost of the calls. -- Frank ess (Drives on the correct half of the roadway) ============================================================================== TOPIC: Lovemaking tips for Seniors http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/b5f4f26559e7e685?hl=en ============================================================================== == 1 of 2 == Date: Sat, Nov 21 2009 3:41 pm From: "musika" In news:[email protected], Robin Bignall <[email protected]> typed: > [Bill M just sent me this. I expect it's been around for a while but > it made me laugh.] > You correspond with Bill Murray? -- Ray UK == 2 of 2 == Date: Sat, Nov 21 2009 3:47 pm From: James Hogg musika wrote: > In news:[email protected], Robin Bignall > <[email protected]> typed: >> [Bill M just sent me this. I expect it's been around for a while >> but it made me laugh.] >> > You correspond with Bill Murray? No, it's obviously Bill Medley, who is now 69. His first single after he left the Righteous Brothers was the prophetic "I Can't Make It Alone". -- James ============================================================================== TOPIC: Wish I may, Wish I might http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/2f823132734a494a?hl=en ============================================================================== == 1 of 1 == Date: Sat, Nov 21 2009 3:47 pm From: Peter Moylan Roland Hutchinson wrote: > On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 16:04:57 -0500, Robert Lieblich wrote: > >> John Dean wrote: >> >> [ ... ] >> >>> In the example I quoted, saying the drug "may have saved his life" >>> means he's alive and it may be that the drug deserves the credit. What >>> the reporter meant was that the drug *might* have saved his life if >>> he'd had it. Which he didn't. >>> Fowler's Third goes into more detail about the subtleties. Basically, >>> we blame the Americans. >> Blame the Americans, sez he. Who murdered the subjunctive, fella? Who >> lost "gotten"? Who walks on pavement? >> >> On the merits of may/might, I'm with you all the way. Fortunately, >> there aren't that many people in the last ditch with us, so it's not too >> uncomfortable. > > I think most Americans are, in fact, in the ditch with y'all. > Probably a different ditch. The last ditch is only lightly populated. -- Peter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org For an e-mail address, see my web page. ============================================================================== TOPIC: Does sarcasm work both ways? http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/32381070ebacb851?hl=en ============================================================================== == 1 of 1 == Date: Sat, Nov 21 2009 4:10 pm From: mm On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 00:10:48 +0100, [email protected] (Donna Richoux) wrote: >mm <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> Thanks. Well. Somehow my language preferences are gone but my >> results per page has stayed the same. That's mildly strange. >> >> I never noticed a difference with my language settings but I reset >> them anyhow and repeated yesterdays search and again got 545 hits. >> (No list of languages searched, like there used to be.) >> >> I copied and pasted yesterday also and I have no idea how I more than >> once yesterday got only 32 hits. > >All I can say is that the same thing has happened to me and other >people, at other times. There are other inexplicable irregularities in >those numbers, and taken together, they mean we can't rely on Google >counts to prove much of anything. I guess not. I'm glad I was never into that count thing anyhow. I thought it didn't report on languages because one of the search terms was site:uk , so I took that out but nothing changed. Yet in another search a few minutes later, it did list the languages I had chosen. -- Posters should say where they live, and for which area they are asking questions. I was born and then lived in Western Pa. 10 years Indianapolis 7 years Chicago 6 years Brooklyn, NY 12 years Baltimore 26 years ============================================================================== TOPIC: Intentional Concussions Considered Harmful? http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/t/86bd25162d20e0c0?hl=en ============================================================================== == 1 of 1 == Date: Sat, Nov 21 2009 5:33 pm From: RichardMaurer Intentional Concussions Considered Harmful? There were some articles recently about the bad effects of concussions in men who played American football in their early years. Later, in their 50s, waay too many were damaged much like Muhammed Ali (the fighter) was. One interesting comment was that most of the damaged men did not experience the worst concussions seen on the highlights films, but had damage as the result of hundreds of lesser impacts. So I wonder about the intentional concussions that are expected in soccer. Has the damage been noticed? How bad is it for former players now in their 50s and 60s? -- --------------------------------------------- Richard Maurer To reply, remove half Sunnyvale, California of a homonym of a synonym for also. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- (Can I pick your new brain?) ============================================================================== You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "alt.usage.english" group. To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english?hl=en To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] To change the way you get mail from this group, visit: http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/subscribe?hl=en To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to [email protected] ============================================================================== Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "socialistas idiotas, maniqueístas, nilistas, ortodoxos e retardados." group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/socialismo?hl=.
