Book Trends
BookFriend
palmer....@sbcglobal.net
BookFriend wrote:
> How do you as collectors and book sellers watch and predict book trends?
In addition to reading internet websites, forums and blogs,
I get some great information from used book dealers. Most
such dealers are quite friendly once they perceive you as a
CUSTOMER. It is far easier to get information from
a used book store than from a new book store, because at
a used book store you often get to talk to the owner or at
least a relilable helper who knows books, where a chain
(which is what most new book stores are in my region these
days) you can often only speak to a kid who is working in
a bookstore because MacDonald's wasn't hiring, or -- if you
luck out and get hold of an employee with a little book
knowledge -- you usually get also someone who is too busy
and regimented to have time for chatting about book trends.
palmer....@sbcglobal.net
John A. Stovall wrote:
> On 2 Oct 2005 18:41:46 -0700, "BookFriend" <bookf...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >How do you as collectors and book sellers watch and predict book trends?
>
> editions don't have. I use world cat and various bibliographies in my
> fields for that.
>
> Why should I care about predicting book trends? The tastes of the
> masses are of little concern to me.
Despite your sophomoric hoity-toity posturing, I
will be glad to explain why, and it has nothing to
do with the "masses." You claim to be a collector,
but you must be wet-behind-the-eaqrs greenhorn of
a collector if you indeed are a collector at all,
and not a mere book accumulator. Trends can have
much to do with wise buying on the part of a
collector. For instance, "Book A" might not
be an important buy right now, because collectors
are seem to be losing interest in books in the
category that "Book A" falls into. As a result
it is likely that books of that type will not
go up much in price soom. On the
other hand, more and more collectors seem
to be interested in books of the "Book B"
type, so it might be prudent to buy "Book B"
since the prices of books in that category
are likely to rise steeply soon. In other
words, providing you are buying the books
you collect and not scrounging them out of
dumpsters, you are already part of a business,
just by being a customer. The more you
know about that business, including trends,
the wiser buyer/collector you will be. Hope
this helps.
>
>
> *******************************************************
>
> "Les livres font les époques et les nations,
> commes les époques et les nations font les livres."
>
> _Mélanges littéraires_
> Jean-Jacques Ampère
> (1800-1864)
Robert Harmon
Some folks buy books as an avocation. They buy what they like & in the best
condition they can afford & usually dispose of a book only if they can
replace it with a better copy.
Other folks buy books as a vocation & they insist on the A list books &
authors. They depend on the disposal of books for their livelyhood & would
gladly stock the most dispicable of authors & titles if it put money in
their pockets.
Now I ask you, which is the true collector?
--
Remove "Z" to reply via email.
------------------------------------------------
palmer....@sbcglobal.net wrote in
news:1128405840.6...@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
michael adams
<palmer....@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:1128405840.6...@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
John A. Stovall wrote:
> On 2 Oct 2005 18:41:46 -0700, "BookFriend" <bookf...@gmail.com>
> fields for that.
>
> Why should I care about predicting book trends? The tastes of the
> masses are of little concern to me.
Despite your sophomoric hoity-toity posturing, I
will be glad to explain why, and it has nothing to
do with the "masses." You claim to be a collector,
but you must be wet-behind-the-eaqrs greenhorn of
a collector if you indeed are a collector at all,
and not a mere book accumulator. Trends can have
much to do with wise buying on the part of a
collector.
...
You have that precisely the wrong way round Palmer.
In advising aspiring collectors to concentrate on
books which are about to go up in price. A collector,
especially one who aspires to be a completist at some
point in the future, will be hoping that prices in his
chosen area will remain low enough for him to know that
he won't be self-blackmailed into paying "ridiculous"
prices for his high spots, at some point in the future. All
any collector requires of current taste and fashion, is that
his quarry doesn't become so little thought of that it ends
up in the dumpster, or otherwise fall victim to woeful neglect
such that no examples no longer survive in a collectable state.
Otherwise prices can fall as low as they will.
The remainder of your remarks appear to be directed
at "investors" in books Palmer - those poor deluded souls
who's financial well being is apparently dependent on wholly
unpredictable fashions and tastes in book collecting as
expresses in current market prices however defined.
The only thing which can be expressed with any certainty
about future book prices Palmer for either your
category a) or category b) is that many of them are likely
to go up and go down in entirely unpredicatble ways -
as seen from the present at least - at some point in
the future.
michael adams
...
Andy Dingley
>How do you as collectors and book sellers watch and predict book trends?
I have a periscope. Sometimes I stick it out from beneath the rock and I
see what the rest of the world is up to. For the most part though I
just ignore it and keep myself to myself. I collect what _I_ want, not
what someone tells me I ought to collect.
Andy Dingley
>providing you are buying the books
>you collect and not scrounging them out of
>dumpsters,
But if I didn't scrounge them out of dumpsters I wouldn't need to clean
them with bleach!
palmer....@sbcglobal.net
You would seem to have missed my point, and that
well may be my fault. Adding some things I left out,
my point was supposed to be this: Most collectors
cannot afford to buy everything they want. That
common limitation leads to making buying decisions.
What to buy now, and what to put off until some future
date. Well, an informed buyer, when needing to
choose, will probably buy the item which is likely
to go up, in order to avoid paying much more for the
same sort of thing next year or the year after
that. Conversely, he or she might put off buying
something which likely will not go up much in
price for a while. So you see, I am not talking
about investing, but about the way informed
collectors make wise buying decisions strictly
related to building their own collections.
>
> The remainder of your remarks appear to be directed
> at "investors" in books Palmer - those poor deluded souls
> who's financial well being is apparently dependent on wholly
> unpredictable fashions and tastes in book collecting as
> expresses in current market prices however defined.
>
> The only thing which can be expressed with any certainty
> about future book prices Palmer for either your
> category a) or category b) is that many of them are likely
> to go up and go down in entirely unpredicatble ways -
> as seen from the present at least - at some point in
> the future.
That is not completely accurate. Let us consider
someone who collects any and all fantasy and science
fiction paperbacks published before 1970. The
prices of Philip K. Dick paperbacks published before
1970 have been climbing for some time. That is a
trend, and a trend which will likely continue,
especially since there is a lot of talk about new
Dick films. On the other hand, the price of Lin
Carter paperbacks of the same vintage has stayed
fairly flat, and there is nothing at this time to
continue that this trend will end soon. Therefore,
considering the trends, the collector might feel
that paying $50 for one Dick title from the
Sixties might be wiser than buying ten Lin
Carter titles from the same period. The
collekctor might consider the trends and
conclude that next year the Dick title might
not be agailable for less than one hundred
dollars -- if a copy can be found at all --
while the ten Lin Carter titles might be
available at the same price they are listed
at this year.
>
>
> michael adams
>
> ...
[...]
michael adams
<palmer....@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:1128488607.0...@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>
> You would seem to have missed my point, and that
> well may be my fault. Adding some things I left out,
> my point was supposed to be this: Most collectors
> cannot afford to buy everything they want. That
> common limitation leads to making buying decisions.
> What to buy now, and what to put off until some future
> date. Well, an informed buyer, when needing to
> choose, will probably buy the item which is likely
> to go up, in order to avoid paying much more for the
> same sort of thing next year or the year after
> that.
...
Precisely wrong. Because in buying one item a collector
is quite likely committing themselves to buying other
associated items at some point in the future. And if this
single item is going up there is no reason not to believe
that all these other items aren't going to go up a well.
...
> Conversely, he or she might put off buying
> something which likely will not go up much in
> price for a while. So you see, I am not talking
> about investing, but about the way informed
> collectors make wise buying decisions strictly
> related to building their own collections.
...
"Informed collectors" aren't best advised to commiting
themselves to buying in areas which are likely to increase
in value in the future Palmer.
That is simply wrong.
...
> That is not completely accurate. Let us consider
> someone who collects any and all fantasy and science
> fiction paperbacks published before 1970.
...
I imagine that would be beyoned the means of most
collectors Palmer, and as such is a meaningless claim
...
> The
> prices of Philip K. Dick paperbacks published before
> 1970 have been climbing for some time.
...
Anyone who hadn't appreciated the significance of
P.K.D to the genre up until this point Palmer, must
have been living in a cave.
Such people are beyond help. End of story.
If they're too young to know about P.K.D. then possibly
they should be looking to collect somebody from
a later generation.
michael adams
...
BobFinnan.com
>Why should I care about predicting book trends? The tastes of the masses are of little concern to me.
What an incredibly pompous, self-important ass you are Stovie.
BobFinnan.com
>>What an incredibly pompous, self-important ass you are Stovie.
>ome of us have standards we live by. If you care for trends you have no standards
Don't you ever tire of being a braying, elitist, empty-headed jackass?
John Pelan
<johnas...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>On 6 Oct 2005 04:39:05 -0700, "BobFinnan.com" <fwd...@hotmail.com>
>wrote:
>********************************************************
>
>"When a true genius appears in this world you may know
> him by the sign that the dunces are all in confederacy
> against him."
>
> Jonathan Swift
> 1667-1745
John:
You don't really think Bobby has read (or understood) Swift, do you?
Cheers,
John
BobFinnan.com
>You don't really think Bobby has read (or understood) Swift, do you?
Like you have (or do)?
Shut the fuck up and go back to your NAMBLA meeting you pervert, before
I'm forced to bitch slap you in public again.
michael adams
"John Pelan" <jpe...@qwest.net> wrote in message
news:l07bk1p3511jkuste...@4ax.com...
Of course he has. He's probably read them all.
Which is more than you have.
Books in The Original Tom Swift Series
Tom Swift and His Motor Cycle: Fun and Adventure on the Road 1910
Tom Swift and His Motor Boat: The Rivals of Lake Carlopa 1910
Tom Swift and His Airship: The Stirring Cruise of the Red Cloud 1910
Tom Swift and His Submarine Boat: Under the Ocean for Sunken Treasure 1910
Tom Swift and His Electric Runabout: The Speediest Car on the Road 1910
Tom Swift and His Wireless Message: The Castaways of Earthquake Island 1911
Tom Swift Among the Diamond Makers: The Secret of Phantom Mountain 1911
Tom Swift in the Caves of Ice: The Wreck of the Airship 1911
Tom Swift and His Sky Racer: The Quickest Flight on Record 1911
Tom Swift and His Electric Rifle: Daring Adventures on Elephant Island 1911
Tom Swift in the City of Gold: Marvelous Adventures Underground 1912
Tom Swift and His Air Glider: Seeking the Platinum Treasure 1912
Tom Swift in Captivity: A Daring Escape by Airship 1912
Tom Swift and His Wizard Camera: Thrilling Adventures While Taking Moving
Pictures 1912
Tom Swift and His Great Search Light: On the Border for Uncle Sam 1912
Tom Swift and His Giant Cannon: The Longest Shots on Record 1913
Tom Swift and His Photo Telephone: The Picture That Saved a Fortune 1914
Tom Swift and His Aerial Warship: The Naval Terror of the Seas 1915
Tom Swift and His Big Tunnel: The Hidden City of the Andes 1916
Tom Swift in the Land of Wonders: The Underground Search for the Idol of
Gold 1917
Tom Swift and His War Tank: Doing His Bit for Uncle Sam 1918
Tom Swift and His Air Scout: Uncle Sam's Mastery of the Sky 1919
Tom Swift and His Undersea Search: The Treasure on the Floor of the Atlantic
1920
Tom Swift Among the Fire Fighters: Battling with Flames in the Air (1921)
Tom Swift and His Electric Locomotive: Two Miles a Minute on the Rails 1922
Tom Swift and His Flying Boat: Castaways of the Giant Iceberg 1923
Tom Swift and His Great Oil Gusher: The Treasure of Goby Farm 1924
Tom Swift and His Chest of Secrets: Tracing the Stolen Inventions 1925
Tom Swift and His Airline Express: From Ocean to Ocean by Daylight 1926
Tom Swift Circling the Globe: The Daring Cruise of the Air Monarch 1927
Tom Swift and His Talking Pictures: The Greatest Invention on Record 1928
Tom Swift and His House on Wheels: A Trip around the Mountain of Mystery
1929
Tom Swift and His Big Dirigible: Adventures Over the Forest of Fire 1930
Tom Swift and His Sky Train: Overland Through the Clouds 1931
Tom Swift and His Giant Magnet: Bringing Up the Lost Submarine 1932
Tom Swift and His Television Detector: Trailing the Secret Plotters 1933
Tom Swift and His Ocean Airport: Foiling the Haargolanders 1934
Tom Swift and His Planet Stone: Discovering the Secret of Another World 1935
Tom Swift and His Giant Telescope 1939
Tom Swift and His Magnetic Silencer 1941
[edit]
Books in The Tom Swift, Jr. Adventure Series
Tom Swift and His Flying Lab 1954
Tom Swift and His Jetmarine 1954
Tom Swift and His Rocket Ship 1954
Tom Swift and His Giant Robot 1954
Tom Swift and His Atomic Earth Blaster 1954
Tom Swift and His Outpost in Space 1955
Tom Swift and His Diving Seacopter 1956
Tom Swift in The Caves of Nuclear Fire 1956
Tom Swift on The Phantom Satellite 1956
Tom Swift and His Ultrasonic Cycloplane 1957
Tom Swift and The Deep-Sea Hydrodome 1958
Tom Swift and His Race to the Moon 1958
Tom Swift and His Space Solartron 1958
Tom Swift and His Electronic Retroscope 1959
Tom Swift and His Spectromarine Selector 1960
Tom Swift and The Cosmic Astronauts 1960
Tom Swift and The Visitor from Planet X 1961
Tom Swift and The Electronic Hydrolung 1961
Tom Swift and His Triphibian Atomicar 1962
Tom Swift and His Megascope Space Prober 1962
Tom Swift and The Asteroid Pirates 1963
Tom Swift and His Repelatron Skyway 1963
Tom Swift and His Aquatomic Tracker 1964
Tom Swift and His 3-D Telejector 1964
Tom Swift and His Polar -Ray Dynasphere 1965
Tom Swift and His Sonic Boom Trap 1965
Tom Swift and His Subocean Geotron 1966
Tom Swift and The Mystery Comet 1966
Tom Swift and The Captive Planetoid 1967
Tom Swift and His G-Force Inverter 1968
Tom Swift and His Dyna-4 Capsule 1969
Tom Swift and His Cosmotron Express 1970
Tom Swift and The Galaxy Ghosts 1971
[edit]
Books in Tom Swift (Third Series)
Tom Swift: The City in the Stars 1981
Tom Swift: Terror on the Moons of Jupiter 1981
Tom Swift: The Alien Probe 1981
Tom Swift: The War in Outer Space 1981
Tom Swift: The Astral Fortress 1981
Tom Swift: The Rescue Mission 1981
Tom Swift: Ark Two 1982
Tom Swift: Crater of Mystery 1983
Tom Swift: Gateway to Doom 1983
Tom Swift: The Invisible Force 1983
Tom Swift: Planet of Nightmares 1984
[edit]
Books in Tom Swift (Fourth Series)
The Black Dragon 1991
The Negative Zone 1991
Cyborg Kickboxer 1991
The DNA Disaster 1991
Monster Machine 1991
The Aquatech Warriors 1991
The Moonstalker 1992
The Microbots 1992
Fire Biker 1992
Mind Games 1992
Mutant Beach 1992
Death Quake 1993
Quantum Force 1993
[edit]
Hardy Boys and Tom Swift Ultra Thrillers
Hardy Boys crossover books from the fourth series:
Time Bomb 1992
The Alien Factor 1993
...
>
> Cheers,
>
> John
michael adams
"John A. Stovall" <johnas...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:dusck1lhlrk7dt80f...@4ax.com...
...
I think you'll find, that just as the majority of people nowadays
regard "Gulliver's Travels" merely as a childrens book, and Johnson
himself singularly failed to see the point of it, most critics
have yet to recognise works such as -
Tom Swift and His Electric Rifle: Daring Adventures on Elephant Island 1911
Tom Swift in the City of Gold: Marvelous Adventures Underground 1912
Tom Swift and His Air Glider: Seeking the Platinum Treasure 1912
Tom Swift in Captivity: A Daring Escape by Airship 1912
For the searing social satires they actually are.
Finnon probably recognised this years ago, and is slowly accumulating
stock until such time as the fact is more generally recognised,
and prices start going through the roof.
That's my theory anyway.
michael adams
...
>
>
> ********************************************************
>
> "A nice man is a man of nasty ideas."
>
> _Introductions to History of the Reformation_
> Jonathan Swift
> 1667-1745
>
John Pelan
wrote:
My, what an incisive wit! Your parents must be awfully proud. I'm
afraid I only get to your area once or twice a year, but you're
certainly welcome to try and "bitchslap" me. I would request that you
sign a waiver first.
Again, your strange talk of NAMBLA implies a familiarity with the
organization that I'm certainly not privy to. I've heard that many of
your customers complain of their books having the pages stuck
together... Can't you exercise some degree of control over your lurid
fantasies of young boys?
May I suggets that you relocate to Thailand, were your odd preferences
are greeted with a greater tolerance than they are here in the States?
Cheerio,
John
John Pelan
<mjad...@onetel.net.uk> wrote:
Damn it, Adams... I just spilled beer all over the keyboard...
Brilliant, sir; brilliant.
Cheers,
John
John Pelan
<mjad...@onetel.net.uk> wrote:
Reminds me of this odd chap in Eugene, OR that was convinced that the
PlaySkool toys would be THE NEXT BIG THING. He liquidated a pretty
fair book collection in order to invest in the things and filled a
warehouse with 'em.
Last I heard, he's sleeping in a garage somewhere, (still a step up
from Bobby, who sleeps in a dumpster).
Cheers,
John
John Pelan
<johnas...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>On Fri, 7 Oct 2005 15:03:54 +0100, "michael adams"
>Such a modest proposal....
>
>
>*******************************************************
>
>""Lord!" he said, "when you sell a man a book you don't
>sell him twelve ounces of paper and ink and glue - you
>sell him a whole new life....""
>
> "Parnassus on Wheels"
> by Christopher Morley
That whooshing sound that you hear is another reference going right
over Bobby's head...
Cheers,
John
Shelf Space
I can't quite understand this compulsion of yours to denigrate the
presumably misfortunate folk who are obliged to live in garages /
dumpsters / trailer parks etc.
Wasn't your friend John 'rbadac' Eatman living in a garage when he
died?
CB
michael adams
"Shelf Space" <haunte...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1128769426.0...@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
...
No Barker. The OP didn't seek to denigrate anyone.
He merely alluded to the presumed advantages of living in a garage
over living in a dumpster.
These are purely practical benefits Barker. Nothing else.
Nobody would say that its overly judgemental to suggest that
keeping dry living inside a garage is preferable to getting
wet living in a dumpster.
The OP is merely stating facts.
From your reaction there Barker one might almost imagine that
the reference to living in garages at least, struck rather
close to the bone.
Just as the fact that someone with a very poor command of English
is forced to pick cabbages for a living, is no reflection on them
Although for some strange unaccountable reason, you seem to
think that is is.
It's merely stating an economic reality.
Oh and eh Barker - its "unfortunate" not "misfortunate"
as you wrote above.
Hoot!
For somebody who claims to have even a passing aquaintance with
English Literature and the Language, your solecisms are beyond belief
at times. "Misfortunate" probably features on countless "howler" sites
but I really can't be bothered. There could have been brownie points
in the archaism "misfortuned" perhaps. But what are the chances of
that happening, eh ?
michael adams
>
my-wings
news:3qpur0F...@individual.net...
>
> "Shelf Space" <haunte...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1128769426.0...@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>
Um....well....included in the 93,000-some websites google reveals as using
the word "misfortunate" are several dictionary sites, including, I'm sure,
the seven dictionaries revealed by OneLook:
http://onelook.com/?w=misfortunate&ls=a
One of these is Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary
(1913)http://machaut.uchicago.edu/?action=search&word=misfortunate&resource=Webster%27s&quicksearch=on
, which calls the word "[Obs.]", possibly making it eligible for the
"archaism brownie points" after all.
I am most definitely not taking sides in support of any party here, except
for the word itself, but I felt compelled to support the unfortunate
"misfortunate" from any stain of bastardism or neologism.
As an aside: This love of words I learned at home, at the dinner table,
where the one reason we were allowed to jump up and run off was to consult
the dictionary to learn the meaning of some new (to us) word that my father
tossed out at us. I can still remember the early vocabulary lessons where we
would learn a new word every day, and play games putting it into sentences.
I will never, ever, forget: "A bomb in a bull makes an abominable mess."
Alice
dictionary junky
fundoc
> Just as the fact that someone with a very poor command of English
> is forced to pick cabbages for a living, is no reflection on them
>
> Although for some strange unaccountable reason, you seem to
> think that is is.
>
> It's merely stating an economic reality.
>
> Oh and eh Barker - its "unfortunate" not "misfortunate"
> as you wrote above.
>
> Hoot!
>
> For somebody who claims to have even a passing aquaintance with
> English Literature and the Language, your solecisms are beyond belief
> at times. "Misfortunate" probably features on countless "howler" sites
> but I really can't be bothered. There could have been brownie points
> in the archaism "misfortuned" perhaps. But what are the chances of
> that happening, eh ?
Dear mullethead:
Misfortunate may appear on countless howler sites, whatever those are.
However, it also appears on page 1443 of Webster's 3d International. Which
makes it a word, and you a dunce.
Also, it might, be a good idea, if you, were, to learn how, to use commas,
correctly, before commenting, on other people's, syntax.
Shelf Space
You don't get out much, do you Adams? Though if you ever do manage to
wade through that pile of empty bottles and unread bills that litter
your bedroom, you might try and struggle down to the local library, if
you can make it passed the off-licene, where in addition to improving
your mind, you might find independent third party proof, for example,
that small retail businesses greatly fear high street charity shops
(contrary to one of your typically absurd claims).
But rest assured, the next time my wife dusts the frame which houses
her university degree, I'll remind her about your obsessive references
to cabbages and illiteracy, and we'll have a good old chuckle about the
curious insights into your own peculiar little life that this seems to
hint at.
Toodle-pip,
CB
Shelf Space
Well said, Alice. I've always had little patience with word pedants,
always favouring the word benders, who often stumble across wonderful
new words.
Shelf Space
To quote from 'The Life Of Brian':
"Nice one, Centurion! Like it, like it!"
michael adams
"my-wings" <my_w...@TAKEOUTatt.net> wrote in message
news:NyQ1f.121093$qY1....@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> > Barker [for it is he],
> > For somebody who claims to have even a passing aquaintance with
> > English Literature and the Language, your solecisms are beyond belief
> > at times. "Misfortunate" probably features on countless "howler" sites
> > but I really can't be bothered. There could have been brownie points
> > in the archaism "misfortuned" perhaps. But what are the chances of
> > that happening, eh ?
> >
> >
> > michael adams
> >
> >>
> >
> >
>
> Um....well....included in the 93,000-some websites google reveals as using
> the word "misfortunate" are several dictionary sites, including, I'm sure,
> the seven dictionaries revealed by OneLook:
> http://onelook.com/?w=misfortunate&ls=a
Ahem. number 5 ?
<quote>
http://www.allwords.com/query.php?SearchType=3&Keyword=
Misfortunate&goquery=Find+it%21&Language=ENG
Your Query of: Misfortunate Found No Matching Entries.
Did you mean:
Misfortune
Fortunate
Unfortunate
<quote>
I think you'll find that the remainder of those all link
to Webster's 1913 Citation of the word being already
"obscure" in The USA. Quite possibly cowboys and the like were
describing things as being "misfortunate" 150 years ago,
but maybe things have moved on a bit since then.
Of course anyone with an online O.E.D will probably blow
that one straight out of the water. But still.
...
Both -
<quote>
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language
Fourth Edition
Search Results for “misfortunate”
No documents match the query.
</quote>
And Chambers 20th Century on paper have no mention of the word.
...
>
> One of these is Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary
>
(1913)http://machaut.uchicago.edu/?action=search&word=misfortunate&resource=
Webster%27s&quicksearch=on
> , which calls the word "[Obs.]", possibly making it eligible for the
> "archaism brownie points" after all.
>
> I am most definitely not taking sides in support of any party here, except
> for the word itself, but I felt compelled to support the unfortunate
> "misfortunate" from any stain of bastardism or neologism.
<quote>
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language
Fourth Edition
Search Results for “misfortunate”
No documents match the query.
</quote>
I repeat " No......documents.......match.......the......query."
If Barker remembers "The "Day Today" where Alan Partridge interviewed
the gangster's relative he might get the reference there.
So again to repeat " No......documents....match....the......query."
However, if Barker can prove he owns a copy of Webster's 1913
dictionary, or has ever owned own, or consulted one with reference
to this particular word, or can cite a work of literature over and
above any already cited online, where the word "misfortunate" can
be found, then I withdraw my accusation.
...
>
> As an aside: This love of words I learned at home, at the dinner table,
> where the one reason we were allowed to jump up and run off was to consult
> the dictionary to learn the meaning of some new (to us) word that my
father
> tossed out at us. I can still remember the early vocabulary lessons where
we
> would learn a new word every day, and play games putting it into
sentences.
> I will never, ever, forget: "A bomb in a bull makes an abominable mess."
>
> Alice
> dictionary junky
>
>
michael adams
not all dictionaries are born equal.
especially any that could be cited in support of Barker.
michael adams
>
> fundoc wrote:
> >
> > Also, it might, be a good idea, if you, were, to learn how, to use
commas,
> > correctly, before commenting, on other people's, syntax.
>
> To quote from 'The Life Of Brian':
>
> "Nice one, Centurion! Like it, like it!"
>
In other words, neither of you know the actual meaning of the word
"syntax" either.
Presumably "S" was missing from that "Webster's 3d International
Dictionary" of fundoc's, which he's now taken to boasting about.
Which is maybe why he got it so cheap.
michael adams
...
michael adams
"fundoc" <fun...@skycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:sQQ1f.33417$7b6....@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
>
>?
>
>
> Dear mullethead:
>
> Misfortunate may appear on countless howler sites, whatever those are.
> However, it also appears on page 1443 of Webster's 3d International. Which
> makes it a word, and you a dunce.
It's cited as being obscure in the USA by 1913.
Would you like to know why it went out of use, Mullethead?
Because "mis" prefixes verbs, as in "mistake", "misplace",
"misunderstand","misconcieved", and indeed "misfortune"
because "fortune" used to function as a verb
While "un" prefixes nouns and adjectives, as in "unsound",
"unable", "unfortunate",etc.
michael adams
michael adams
>
> michael adams wrote:
> But rest assured, the next time my wife dusts the frame which houses
> her university degree,
Why would she need to hang it on the wall then, Barker ?
Does she have difficult time convincing people otherwise?
Why is that?
University Of Uzbejisthan
Field Botany
Where does she hang it then Barker, next to your Cycling Proficiency
Certificate ?
michael adams
...
Shelf Space
Granny Adams: Top o' the mornin' to you me lad. Know, sitchaself down
here and tell your old granny wathca been up to.
Michael Adams: Well granny, I spent Saturday night arguing about the
meaning of the word 'syntax'.
GA: Aww, away widja! What did you reely do?
MA: I told you gran, I spent the evening arguing --
*GA cuffs Adams around ear*
GA: Oi've had enuff wid all your tarra-riddles young Michael Adams!
Only a bloody ejit would waste a precious Saturday night arguing about
such nonsense!
John Pelan
wrote:
Why is it that boring, unfunny twats always quote Monty Python?
Cheers,
John
John Pelan
wrote:
>
>my-wings wrote:
>> "michael adams" <mjad...@onetel.net.uk> wrote in message
>> news:3qpur0F...@individual.net...
>> >
>> > "Shelf Space" <haunte...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> > news:1128769426.0...@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> I can't quite understand this compulsion of yours to denigrate the
>> >> presumably misfortunate folk who are obliged to live in garages /
>> >> dumpsters / trailer parks etc.
>> >>
>> >> Wasn't your friend John 'rbadac' Eatman living in a garage when he
>> >> died?
>> >>
>> >> CB
That you would use the death of one of my friends as fuel for your
sick little vendetta speaks volumes as to just what an evil and
depraved little fuck you are.
My point was not to denigrate anything except the foolishness of
attempting to predict trends and make purchasing decisions based on
such projections. You are easily one of the most vile creatures I've
ever encountered.
John
michael adams
Granny Adams: Top o' the mornin' to you me lad. Know, sitchaself
down here and tell your old granny wathca been up to.
Its such a long since we've seen you Mickeen. Did ya hear
that we're getting really worried about our Seaneen there not
being able to find a wife for himself to help run the farm. Oh
and was I telling you little Bridie has now got a computher
and she's always at the surfing the interweb, I tink they call
it now. But its our Seaneen were really worried about Michaeleen,
and him not having the wife. Now do you have any ideas...
Michael Adams: Well granny, its like this......
To be continued
fundoc
>
> "fundoc" <fun...@skycap.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:sQQ1f.33417$7b6....@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
>>
>>?
>>
>>
>> Dear mullethead:
>>
>> Misfortunate may appear on countless howler sites, whatever those are.
>> However, it also appears on page 1443 of Webster's 3d International.
>> Which
>> makes it a word, and you a dunce.
>
>
>
> It's cited as being obscure in the USA by 1913.
>
It's too late for research now lunkhead. What you should have researched was
your initial post, the one in which you stated that "misfortunate," a word
used in English for about the last 500 years, didn't exist, and that its use
was so egregious that it was in fact a "howler" and a "solecism." Had you,
you might not have revealed yourself as a barely literate fucking wank and
wouldn't now be frantically googling up alleged authorities for your
preposterous assertion. The fact is that both Websters Universal and W3I --
both dictionaries printed within the last 20 years or so -- contain entries
for misfortunate, misfortune, and misfortuned, (pp 1149 and 1443,
respectively) and neither says anything about any of the words falling out
of fashion in 1913 or any other year, except to say parenthetically that the
use of misfortune as an intransitive verb is obsolete. Which makes you a
liar as well as a dimwit. So perhaps you'll do me the favor of buggering off
now, thanks ever so.
michael adams
>
> "michael adams" <mjad...@onetel.net.uk> wrote in message
> news:3qq92mF...@individual.net...
> >
> > "fundoc" <fun...@skycap.rr.com> wrote in message
> > news:sQQ1f.33417$7b6....@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
> >>
> >>?
> >>
> >>
> >> Dear mullethead:
> >>
> >> Misfortunate may appear on countless howler sites, whatever those are.
> >> However, it also appears on page 1443 of Webster's 3d International.
> >> Which
> >> makes it a word, and you a dunce.
> >
> >
> >
> > It's cited as being obscure in the USA by 1913.
> >
> > Would you like to know why <snip>
>
>
> It's too late for research now lunkhead. What you should have researched
was
> your initial post, the one in which you stated that "misfortunate," a word
> used in English for about the last 500 years
Er.......cites ?
, didn't exist,
That was then. This is now pea-brain. Things move on.
<quote>
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language
Fourth Edition
Search Results for “misfortunate”
No documents match the query.
</quote>
So are you claiming that
"The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language"
is wrong?
...
> and that its use
> was so egregious that it was in fact a "howler" and a "solecism."
...
It's only egregious to we cognoscenti you cretin. That's the whole point.
As soon as I saw it I knew it was wrong. Whereas the likes of untutored
oiks such as Barker and yourself clearly wouldn't.
I notice you've dropped all references to my correcting Barker's
"syntax" there btw. A good move on your part, if you don't mind
me saying.
Whereas all the "E's" in those dictionaries of yours seem to have
survived intact. Which is something, I suppose.
...
> Had you,
> you might not have revealed yourself as a barely literate fucking wank and
> wouldn't now be frantically googling up alleged authorities for your
> preposterous assertion. The fact is that both Websters Universal and
W3I --
> both dictionaries printed within the last 20 years or so -- contain
entries
> for misfortunate, misfortune, and misfortuned, (pp 1149 and 1443,
...
So you've got two dictionaries now then!
And both printed within the last 20 years as well.
I am impressed!
So why was that ? Was there something wrong with the first one
or something ? Or did you find the second one in the same place as
you found the first one ? Lucky old you, eh?
Cites you moron, give me cites. So who we talkin bow here -
Straight Outta Compton, Puff Daddy, World Class Wreckin Cru
who exactly is de Barker dude runnin wid dese days ?
michael adams
...
Shelf Space
No, you're not being honest. The internet and RCB in particular is
littered with your disparaging references to people who live in trailer
parks or who trawl through rubbish bins looking for books to sell. It
runs parallel to your oft-repeated boasts to be a successful
too-earning writer and book publisher.
This recurring theme - denigrate the less fortunate whilst feeling good
about yourself - hints at much insecurity, possibly from one who lives,
or has lived, very close to real hardship. However, that issue doesn't
concern me; what bothers me is that you regularly disparage other
people by looking down upon them for living in a garage, trailer park
or a dumpster (whatever a dumpster is), whilst overlooking the fact
that one of your own friends lived in a garage.
I think it says quite a lot about the sort of person you are. That, and
your foul language, and your stalking of me around the internet, and
your constant bombardment of abusive emails to my hotmail account.
CB
John Pelan
wrote:
Shut the fuck up, you stupid toad. No one has sent any e-mails to your
hotmail account; this is just more of your sick fabrications, Good
Lord, it's barely a week into the month, have you used up all your
meds already? Do try and show some self-control, won't you?
Good day,
John
fundoc
> So are you claiming that
>
> "The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language"
>
> is wrong?
The online version of AHD has 90,000 word entries. Are you claiming that
there are only 90,000 words in the English language?
The print version of AHD has 350 K word entries. Webster III has 450 K. OED
has 600 K.
<twaddle hosed>
> So you've got two dictionaries now then!
>
> And both printed within the last 20 years as well.
>
> I am impressed!
I'm not surprised. You should get one yourself, you wouldn't end up writing
horribly embarasssing 'flames' that display your unfamiliarity with the
language.
> So why was that ? Was there something wrong with the first one
> or something ?
Well no. You kept saying that misfortunate was declared obsolete in 1913 and
seeing no such thing in W3I I decided to check the second one on the odd
chance that you weren't lying out your ass. Which you were.
> Or did you find the second one in the same place as
> you found the first one ?
> Lucky old you, eh?
>
> Cites
I cited first one dictionary, then another, which is where one finds words
and their definitions. Except in rcb, where every third person is Humpty
Dumpty.
<Zzzz hosed>
michael adams
> "michael adams" <mjad...@onetel.net.uk> wrote in message
> news:3qsqu4F...@individual.net...
>
> > So are you claiming that
> >
> > "The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language"
> >
> > is wrong?
>
> The online version of AHD has 90,000 word entries. Are you claiming that
> there are only 90,000 words in the English language?
...
Nope. It just happens to be the best, authoratative, online source
there is available.
Unless you want to pay a subscription. In which case it would be
impossible to leave a link to allow others to check for themselves.
...
>
> The print version of AHD has 350 K word entries. Webster III has 450 K.
OED
> has 600 K.
...
My Chambers 20th Century has 1651 pages. They don't sell dictionaries
in the UK on the basis of how many words they contain unfortunately
and I don't have the time or the inclination to count them all.
In any case dictionaries record usage. They don't prescribe it.
Larger dictionaries contain larger numbers of recorded
historical usages.
Barker wasn't aware of any historical usages. And therefore as
such he wasn't entitled to use the word, because it deviates from
an accepted grammatical convention.
I realised this straightaway.
If Barker himself had cited a reference to its use in Piers Plowman
or Shakespeare or possibly Gangsta Rap then I would indeed have been
left with egg on my face. Grammatical convention or not.
But he didn't. He gave it up -
"Shelf Space" <haunte...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1128783368....@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Well said, Alice. I've always had little patience with word pedants,
> always favouring the word benders, who often stumble across wonderful
> new words.
I repeat "wonderful new words "
^^^^
I suppose you're now going to start arguing about the meaning of
the word "new" as well now, are you?
...
> > or something ?
>
> Well no. You kept saying that misfortunate was declared obsolete in 1913
and
> seeing no such thing in W3I I decided to check the second one on the odd
> chance that you weren't lying out your ass. Which you were.
So quote me some usages and their quoted sources please. That's what
I mean by a cite. Large dictionaries quote actual usages, as culled from
contemporary print sources, either books, newspapapers or possibly
the private letters etc of literary figures. Or maybe even gangsta
rap records, who knows? And give the source.
Not that any of this is strictly relevant as Barker has already given
it up. But I'd be intersted in any 20th century usages you might
care to cite nevertheless
From these two really big dictionaries of yours.
michael adams