Path: g2news1.google.com!news4.google.com!sn-xit-04!sn-xit-11!sn-xit-05!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail From: m...@vex.net (Mark Brader) Newsgroups: alt.usage.english Subject: Re: In "the sticks" Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 05:47:35 -0000 Organization: - Message-ID: <11ndkrn18lq9r13@corp.supernews.com> References: <1131819094.583125.244030@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test76 (Apr 2, 2001) Originator: m...@shell.vex.net (Mark Brader) X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 40 Jerry Friedman writes: > I still think the other way around would have been a lot more like > English. The Google oracle agrees with me: > > "Hix Nix Stix Pix": 2650 (some of which refer to a book by David > Llewellyn Burdett) > "Sticks Nix Hick Pix": 800 It appears, to a first approximation, that it's only Burdett who agrees with Jerry, or at least, is willing to "improve" the headline that way: "hix nix stix pix" burdett 2,410 "hix nix stix pix" -burdett 248 Also, Burdett's word order is only common in one spelling, while Variety's version is common in three, which collectively outgoogle it: "hix nix stix pix" 2,650 "stix nix hix pix" 1,960 "sticks nix hick pix" 802 "stix nix hick pix" 304 Of the versions with the original word order, the "fully improved" version with four X's is now the most popular (which doesn't surprise me), and the actual headline ranks second. I also found these variants: "hicks nix sticks pix" 32 "sticks nix hicks pix" 12 "hicks nix stix pix" 6 "sticks nix hix pix" 5 "stix nix hicks pix" 4 "hick nix sticks pix" 3 "hix nix sticks pix" 1 There were no hits on "hick nix stix pix" or any version with "stick". -- Mark Brader, Toronto "Nix vix belix in chix." m...@vex.net -- after Nietzsche My text in this article is in the public domain.