"paper, scissors, stone?" or "Stone, paper, scissors?"
Miss Yu
John Seeliger
news:akf8sk$m9s$1...@news.ethome.net.tw...
> Can someone tell me which sentence is more often said?
Where I come from it's "Rock, Paper, Scissors"
Rock breaks Scissors.
Paper covers Rock.
Scissors cut Paper.
--
John Seeliger Limited but increasing content
jsee...@yahoo.com <http://www.freewebz.com/hudathunkett/>
jsee...@aaahawk.com
CyberCypher
146094.news.dfncis.de:
> "Miss Yu" <yu1...@ethome.net.tw> wrote in message
> news:akf8sk$m9s$1...@news.ethome.net.tw...
>> Can someone tell me which sentence is more often said?
>
> Where I come from it's "Rock, Paper, Scissors"
And "Scissors, Paper, Rock" where I come from.
> Rock breaks Scissors.
> Paper covers Rock.
> Scissors cut Paper.
--
Franke
Mike Lyle
And for me, a much Anglicised Australian, "Scissors, paper, stone".
Scissors cuts paper.
Paper wraps up stone.
Stone blunts scissors.
I have just noticed that I gave "scissors" a singular verb: this is
very old-fashioned in most places, but in here West Wales "a scissors"
is the norm. I don't know if my sentence represents where I live, or
if for this traditional purpose it's still said that way in places
where scissors have long been plural.
Mike.
rzed
"Mike Lyle" <mike_l...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3fa4d950.02082...@posting.google.com...
Here in Virginia, by way of Wisconsin, USA: same story.
Scissors, paper, stone. A pair of scissors, in my vernacular, but
"scissors cuts paper" seems right in this context. Why is that, I
wonder?
--
rzed
david56
>
> Scissors cuts paper.
> Paper wraps up stone.
> Stone blunts scissors.
>
> I have just noticed that I gave "scissors" a singular verb: this is
> very old-fashioned in most places, but in here West Wales "a scissors"
> is the norm. I don't know if my sentence represents where I live, or
> if for this traditional purpose it's still said that way in places
> where scissors have long been plural.
I believe this is by extrapolation from Welsh; I think it happens for
"trousers" as well. Both these words are resolutely plural to my
Worcestershire ears.
--
David
I say what it occurs to me to say.
=====
The address is valid today, but I will change it to keep ahead of the
spammers.
John Seeliger
news:akg6ds$bg0$1...@mailgate2.lexis-nexis.com...
No different than pants/shorts.
Pants must be worn to all classes except PE. In PE, shorts must be worn.
And both words may be preceded by "a pair of".
John Seeliger
news:3D6BA089...@ntlworld.com...
> Mike Lyle wrote:
> >
> > Scissors cuts paper.
> > Paper wraps up stone.
> > Stone blunts scissors.
> >
> > I have just noticed that I gave "scissors" a singular verb: this is
> > very old-fashioned in most places, but in here West Wales "a scissors"
> > is the norm. I don't know if my sentence represents where I live, or
> > if for this traditional purpose it's still said that way in places
> > where scissors have long been plural.
>
> I believe this is by extrapolation from Welsh; I think it happens for
> "trousers" as well. Both these words are resolutely plural to my
> Worcestershire ears.
I just posted the same thing, but used "pants" instead. I was once told by
an English friend that "pants" means something entirely different to her,
i.e. underwear. specifically what Americans would call panties.
david56
>
> "david56" <bass.a...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
> news:3D6BA089...@ntlworld.com...
> > Mike Lyle wrote:
> > >
> > > Scissors cuts paper.
> > > Paper wraps up stone.
> > > Stone blunts scissors.
> > >
> > > I have just noticed that I gave "scissors" a singular verb: this is
> > > very old-fashioned in most places, but in here West Wales "a scissors"
> > > is the norm. I don't know if my sentence represents where I live, or
> > > if for this traditional purpose it's still said that way in places
> > > where scissors have long been plural.
> >
> > I believe this is by extrapolation from Welsh; I think it happens for
> > "trousers" as well. Both these words are resolutely plural to my
> > Worcestershire ears.
>
> I just posted the same thing, but used "pants" instead. I was once told by
> an English friend that "pants" means something entirely different to her,
> i.e. underwear. specifically what Americans would call panties.
Indeed. In UK English, "pants" means the underwear you pull up over
your legs, for both men and women. Although women's pants are also
called panties, and more commonly knickers.
"Underwear" includes pants, vest and bra (if worn). "vest" of course
means "undershirt". "waistcoat" means "vest". I hope you've got all
this - there will be a short test later. ("test" means "quiz", at least
in some parts of the US).
Having said that, some parts of the UK use "pants" for "trousers". My
wife, who is from South Yorkshire, can mean either lower underwear or
trousers when saying "pants", and might use "pants" or "trousers" to
refer to what I always call trousers. It's all a matter of context.
Aaron J. Dinkin
> "rzed" <Dick....@lexisnexis.com> wrote in message
> news:akg6ds$bg0$1...@mailgate2.lexis-nexis.com...
>
>> Here in Virginia, by way of Wisconsin, USA: same story.
>> Scissors, paper, stone. A pair of scissors, in my vernacular, but
>> "scissors cuts paper" seems right in this context. Why is that, I
>> wonder?
>
> No different than pants/shorts.
>
> Pants must be worn to all classes except PE. In PE, shorts must be worn.
>
> And both words may be preceded by "a pair of".
Eh? I'm not sure what you're trying to demonstrate here. Would you say
"Pants is worn"?
-Aaron J. Dinkin
Dr. Whom
Ben Zimmer
John Seeliger wrote:
>
> "Miss Yu" <yu1...@ethome.net.tw> wrote in message
> news:akf8sk$m9s$1...@news.ethome.net.tw...
> > Can someone tell me which sentence is more often said?
>
> Where I come from it's "Rock, Paper, Scissors"
Last time this came up here it was determined that "rock, paper,
scissors" is the most common variant for Leftpondians, and "paper,
scissors, stone" is most common for Rightpondians.
Pat Durkin
non-public use seem to call the apparel "pants" or "underpants". I can
remember hearing the couplet "I see London, I see France. I see
somebody's underpants." That was in the days before girls started
wearing slacks to school and playground. It was enough to make some
girls fall off the bars in embarassment.
> Indeed. In UK English, "pants" means the underwear you pull up over
> your legs, for both men and women. Although women's pants are also
> called panties, and more commonly knickers.
>
> "Underwear" includes pants, vest and bra (if worn). "vest" of course
> means "undershirt". "waistcoat" means "vest". I hope you've got all
> this - there will be a short test later. ("test" means "quiz", at
least
> in some parts of the US).
For most Americans, a quiz is a test. It would never, for example
replace test in "standardized test". Quiz is an informal or slang term.
I guess you never heard the college joke. It ends, "Well, if this is
what you call a quizzie, I'd sure like to see your testes."
david56
>
> For most Americans, a quiz is a test. It would never, for example
> replace test in "standardized test". Quiz is an informal or slang term.
> I guess you never heard the college joke. It ends, "Well, if this is
> what you call a quizzie, I'd sure like to see your testes."
You're right, I never heard it.
CyberCypher
news:3fa4d950.02082...@posting.google.com:
We just went through this one a few months ago, I'm sure. "a scissors"
is perfectly acceptable and grammatical English. Not everyone agrees,
of course, but that's why we're here. I think the example sentence I
found in one dictionary or another was something on the order of "She
cut everything to shreds with a scissors". It would be just as good,
but two words longer, to say "She cut everything to shreds with a pair
of scissors". The former sentence is elliptical and the latter, full.
--
Franke
John Varela
> Well, "panties" is a fancy and delicate word. Many or most women in
> non-public use seem to call the apparel "pants" or "underpants".
It's been a long time since I read any of Thorne Smith's books but, if I
recall correctly, he called them "step-ins". He was writing about 70 years
ago.
> Quiz is an informal or slang term.
It was the standard term at MIT in the 50s. We had quizzes and exams. No
tests. In high school we had tests.
Did you get the key scratch on your car fixed?
--
John Varela
Pat Durkin
"John Varela" <jav...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:NKQS2gVdCOMx-p...@dialup-64.157.49.146.Dial1.Washington
1.Level3.net...
> On Tue, 27 Aug 2002 18:41:43 UTC, "Pat Durkin" <p...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
>
> > Well, "panties" is a fancy and delicate word. Many or most women
in
> > non-public use seem to call the apparel "pants" or "underpants".
>
> It's been a long time since I read any of Thorne Smith's books but, if
I
> recall correctly, he called them "step-ins". He was writing about 70
years
> ago.
>
am familiar with. I think "step-ins" fits into the late 19th, early
20th century.
> > Quiz is an informal or slang term.
>
> It was the standard term at MIT in the 50s. We had quizzes and exams.
No
> tests. In high school we had tests.
I forgot all about exams, but we used that word interchangeably with
tests while in college. Can't recall any "quiz" in high school, though.
>
> Did you get the key scratch on your car fixed?
I just discovered it yesterday. How did you know it was my car? Your
arms must be as long as a chimp's.
Tony Cooper
"John Varela" <jav...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:NKQS2gVdCOMx-p...@dialup-64.157.49.146.Dial1.Washington
1.Level3.net...
wrote:
>
> > Well, "panties" is a fancy and delicate word. Many or most women
in
> > non-public use seem to call the apparel "pants" or "underpants".
>
> It's been a long time since I read any of Thorne Smith's books but, if
I
> recall correctly, he called them "step-ins". He was writing about 70
years
> ago.
You recall correctly. Even ghosts wore step-ins.
--
Tony Cooper aka: Tony_Co...@Yahoo.com
Provider of Jots & Tittles
--
Tony Cooper aka: Tony_Co...@Yahoo.com
Provider of Jots & Tittles
Tony Cooper
> I certainly have seen the word, though Thorne Smith is not an author I
> am familiar with. I think "step-ins" fits into the late 19th, early
> 20th century.
A very funny author. His series on "Topper" (Topper Takes a Trip, etc)
was later adapted to the silver screen. A very dignified and proper man
that met the ghosts of a young couple killed in an automobile accident.
He could see them, but other people couldn't. Sort of "Harvey" with
people.
Can't recall any "quiz" in high school, though.
No pop quizzes?
Mike Lyle
> Mike Lyle wrote:
> >
> > Scissors cuts paper.
> > Paper wraps up stone.
> > Stone blunts scissors.
> >
> > I have just noticed that I gave "scissors" a singular verb: this is
> > very old-fashioned in most places, but in here West Wales "a scissors"
> > is the norm. I don't know if my sentence represents where I live, or
> > if for this traditional purpose it's still said that way in places
> > where scissors have long been plural.
>
> I believe this is by extrapolation from Welsh; I think it happens for
> "trousers" as well. Both these words are resolutely plural to my
> Worcestershire ears.
"A scissors" used to be normal BrE, not just WelshE -- somebody has
just said they think it still is, which I'm inclined to doubt. The
extrapolation with *siswrn* may therefore be in the other direction.
Unfortunately, the only Welsh word I know for "trousers" is "trowsis",
so I can't deal with that example!
Mike.
John Varela
>
> "John Varela" <jav...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:NKQS2gVdCOMx-p...@dialup-64.157.49.146.Dial1.Washington
> 1.Level3.net...
> > Did you get the key scratch on your car fixed?
>
> I just discovered it yesterday. How did you know it was my car?
We have our ways. Besides, who else on aue drives an "Ash Gold" Volvo?
--
John Varela
John Varela
wrote:
> "Pat Durkin" <p...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> > I certainly have seen the word, though Thorne Smith is not an author I
> > am familiar with. I think "step-ins" fits into the late 19th, early
> > 20th century.
>
> A very funny author. His series on "Topper" (Topper Takes a Trip, etc)
> was later adapted to the silver screen. A very dignified and proper man
> that met the ghosts of a young couple killed in an automobile accident.
> He could see them, but other people couldn't. Sort of "Harvey" with
> people.
He wrote other fantasies, such as "The Night Live of the Gods" and "The
Glorious Pool". They were full of booze and copulation, great favorites of
mine when I was 14.
--
John Varela
rzed
ton2.Level3.net...
So ... John: exactly where were you on August 27, 2002, hmmm? And do
you mind if we just have a quick glance at your keys?
--
rzed
Tony Cooper
> He wrote other fantasies, such as "The Night Live of the Gods" and
"The
> Glorious Pool". They were full of booze and copulation, great
favorites of
> mine when I was 14.
I read them all, and at about the same age. In the volumes I read,
there were some great pen-and-ink sketches at the beginning of each
chapter. That's Night Life, by the way, but just a typo of no
importance.
My father was the one that acquired the books. My mother didn't approve
of them. She didn't disallow reading them, but she disapproved.
"Forever Amber", on the other hand, had to be read in the closet by
flashlight.
Mike Lyle
Pausing only to mention that the above shows how much reliance can be
placed on what we say in this group, I come to "rock" (countable
noun).
Subject to subtle rules of variation, in BrE, and at least in more
traditional ANZ usage, a "stone" is usually small enough to throw, or
at any rate to carry; while a "rock" is bigger. A "rock" could
generally only be thrown by a volcano or a ballista.
Have AmE speakers a way of making these distinctions without the use
of adjectives?
(One of the more curious bits of BBC reporter behaviour is always to
switch from natural Br speech to what they think are American
alternatives when describing events in foreign countries. In the news,
a British person "carries" a gun; a foreigner, especially a
low-ranking one such as an Albanian, "totes" it.)
Mike.
Mike Lyle
>
> Last time this came up here it was determined that "rock, paper,
> scissors" is the most common variant for Leftpondians, and "paper,
> scissors, stone" is most common for Rightpondians.
Sorry. The parenthesis in my post about rock and stone omits a step.
To clarify, I should have said that when abroad BBC people tend to
report foreigners as "throwing rocks" though at home they would say
"throwing stones".
Mike.
John Seeliger
> Ben Zimmer <bgzi...@midway.uchicago.edu> wrote in message
news:<3D6BC2E2...@midway.uchicago.edu>...
> > John Seeliger wrote:
> > >
> > > "Miss Yu" <yu1...@ethome.net.tw> wrote in message
> > > news:akf8sk$m9s$1...@news.ethome.net.tw...
> > > > Can someone tell me which sentence is more often said?
> > >
> > > Where I come from it's "Rock, Paper, Scissors"
> >
> > Last time this came up here it was determined that "rock, paper,
> > scissors" is the most common variant for Leftpondians, and "paper,
> > scissors, stone" is most common for Rightpondians.
> >
> > http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&th=5ee8ed242bf5854f
>
> Pausing only to mention that the above shows how much reliance can be
> placed on what we say in this group, I come to "rock" (countable
> noun).
>
> Subject to subtle rules of variation, in BrE, and at least in more
> traditional ANZ usage, a "stone" is usually small enough to throw, or
> at any rate to carry; while a "rock" is bigger. A "rock" could
> generally only be thrown by a volcano or a ballista.
>
I'm not sure I agree. A rock can be small too, in my dialect. I remember
thinking about this thread a couple of days ago and thinking that maybe
stone in general, not just in the title of this game, was more popular in
the UK and rock in the US.
> Have AmE speakers a way of making these distinctions without the use
> of adjectives?
>
> (One of the more curious bits of BBC reporter behaviour is always to
> switch from natural Br speech to what they think are American
> alternatives when describing events in foreign countries. In the news,
> a British person "carries" a gun; a foreigner, especially a
> low-ranking one such as an Albanian, "totes" it.)
I rarely use "tote" unless I am referring to a PBS telethon and they are
giving away a tote bag for a $30 contribution (and I have watched enough PBS
recently to conclude that KERA doesn't seem to do that as much any more. I
have not seen a KERA tote bag mentioned during any of the telethons I have
seen in the past year that I recall and I wasn't watching much over the few
years preceding last year.) or in the phrase "gun-toting" or maybe
"X-toting" for some "X" to make the person sound more dangerous/fanatical.
Richard Fontana
On 30 Aug 2002, Mike Lyle wrote:
> Pausing only to mention that the above shows how much reliance can be
> placed on what we say in this group, I come to "rock" (countable
> noun).
>
> Subject to subtle rules of variation, in BrE, and at least in more
> traditional ANZ usage, a "stone" is usually small enough to throw, or
> at any rate to carry; while a "rock" is bigger. A "rock" could
> generally only be thrown by a volcano or a ballista.
>
> Have AmE speakers a way of making these distinctions without the use
> of adjectives?
In my AmE dialect "rock" is the more natural term for either the small or
the big sort of countable thing. "A stone" couldn't refer to a big rock,
but it could refer to a small one, but it's slightly more literary or
unnatural. Also, "stone" to me vaguely suggests something smoother than
"rock" (cf. adjective "rocky").
> (One of the more curious bits of BBC reporter behaviour is always to
> switch from natural Br speech to what they think are American
> alternatives when describing events in foreign countries. In the news,
> a British person "carries" a gun; a foreigner, especially a
> low-ranking one such as an Albanian, "totes" it.)
Verb "tote" is or is mainly regional AmE (Southern?); it's not a feature
of my dialect at all, though "tote bag" is, and I'm familiar with (but
wouldn't use) the expression "in tote".
John Varela
wrote:
> Subject to subtle rules of variation, in BrE, and at least in more
> traditional ANZ usage, a "stone" is usually small enough to throw, or
> at any rate to carry; while a "rock" is bigger. A "rock" could
> generally only be thrown by a volcano or a ballista.
>
> Have AmE speakers a way of making these distinctions without the use
> of adjectives?
To me, both rock and stone are materials. A rock is generally something you
can pick up and throw, but can be larger. To clear a building foundation,
it might take several men or even dynamite to remove a rock. If someone
spoke of "a stone" I would know what he meant, but it's not something I
would say myself. A small (up to several inches diameter) rock that has
been rounded in a stream is a pebble. Pebble is not a material, though
pebble dash is a decorative exterior wall created by flinging pebbles into
wet stucco.
One collects rocks to build a stone wall.
--
John Varela
John Varela
> So ... John: exactly where were you on August 27, 2002, hmmm? And do
> you mind if we just have a quick glance at your keys?
I have 20 witnesses who can place me on the East Coast on that date.
--
John Varela
John Holmes
"rzed" <Dick....@lexisnexis.com> wrote in message
news:akg6ds$bg0$1...@mailgate2.lexis-nexis.com...
>
>
> Scissors, paper, stone. A pair of scissors, in my vernacular, but
> "scissors cuts paper" seems right in this context. Why is that, I
> wonder?
I'd guess it because you are treating the scissors as a symbol rather
than a literal pair of scissors. It's like saying 'spades trumps clubs'
in a game of cards.
--
Regards
John
Pavel314
John Holmes <hol...@smart.net.au> wrote in message
news:akp7qn$ifc$1...@perki.connect.com.au...
>
> "rzed" <Dick....@lexisnexis.com> wrote in message
> news:akg6ds$bg0$1...@mailgate2.lexis-nexis.com...
> >
> >
> > Here in Virginia, by way of Wisconsin, USA: same story.
> > Scissors, paper, stone.
In Cleveland it was "rock, paper, scissors".
pli
John Seeliger
news:I0Pa9.99767$aA.21937@sccrnsc02...
Sorry. I was thinking the verb was plural. But I agree. Scissors cuts
paper works with a singular verb.
John Seeliger
Lucky they were wearing underpants. Otherwise, it might be even more
embarrassing.
And yes, I do remember the England/France rhyme too.
Tony Cooper
I have never played the referenced game, and don't even know the rules.
I'm familiar enough with it to recognize it if someone is playing it.
Am I the only one here that wouldn't know how to participate if they
came across a Stone, Paper, Scissors tournement?
Laura F Spira
>
> I have never played the referenced game, and don't even know the rules.
> I'm familiar enough with it to recognize it if someone is playing it.
>
> Am I the only one here that wouldn't know how to participate if they
> came across a Stone, Paper, Scissors tournement?
>
>
Yup. But you could kibitz.
--
Laura
(emulate St. George for email)
Skitt
> Tony Cooper wrote:
>> I have never played the referenced game, and don't even know the
>> rules. I'm familiar enough with it to recognize it if someone is
>> playing it.
>>
>> Am I the only one here that wouldn't know how to participate if they
>> came across a Stone, Paper, Scissors tournement?
>
> Yup. But you could kibitz.
Only if he finds a "tournement".
--
Skitt (in SF Bay Area) http://www.geocities.com/opus731/
I speak English well -- I learn it from a book!
-- Manuel (Fawlty Towers)