Fan Drinking (Was Re: The Death of the SF Bestseller?...)
FitchDonS
Richard Newsome (new...@panix.com ,<5dtu4i$h...@panix2.panix.com>,
12 Feb.) wrote:
>I do think there has been, in the past, a really strikingly high
>incidence of heavy alcohol use among both fans and pros in the sf
>field. This seems to have abated somewhat over the last 15 years
>or so. I can certainly think of an almost endless procession of
>well known fans and pros that I have seen blind, staggering,
>knee-walking drunk; and I can think of a number that I have never
>seen in any condition other than blind staggering drunk.
>
>If someone had done a careful statistical survey at the time it
>would not have surprised me if there had, in fact, turned out to
>be a positive correlation between sf and alcoholism. These days
>people seem to be a good deal more sober -- are those all-night
>drunken blasts a thing of the past?
This is anecdotal, of course, but...
I discovered fandom c. 1959, after having been in the army (Japan
& Korea) for 18 months, followed by 3 years at the University of
California (though -- as you might have guessed -- not in Frat
circles). I did not find fannish drinking conspicuously different
from mundane in the percentage of people who drank. I _was_
strongly (& favorably) impressed by the way most people in fandom
Paced Themselves (as F.M.Busby put it) -- a matter of drinking
until one reaches the desired moderately-altered state of
consciousness and then Maintaining at this level for hours or days
(throughout an entire convention, for some, apparently).
It's true that some fans (including Buz) & pros set a level rather
beyond what I considered ideal, and a few (especially Pros) were
out-and-out alcoholics or at least got thoroughly drunk at every
convention _I_ saw them at. (How often they might have done this
was/is unclear; convention situations are notoriously subject to
observational error of the (possibly fallacious) "People who do X
when I'm looking also do it all the time when I'm not looking"
kind.)
There were, of course, usually a few youngfans/neos (at most cons)
who were just learning to drink, and who got drunk in public for
the first time in their lives. Seeing the amusement in the eyes
of one's peers &/or idols in the elevator the next /m/o/r/n/i/n/g/
afternoon, and reading less-than-admiring accounts of one's
activity in ConReports in fanzines over the following few months,
seem to have been reasonably effective in making this the last, as
well as the first, time for most such public exhibitions.
While drinking was certainly much more popular in fandom in those
days than it is now, it seemed to me that there was much less
pressure to conform/drink than in the other (primarily adolescent
male) social groups with which I was acquainted. It was perfectly
OK not to drink (but not to say that no-one else should), and the
company of most fan drinkers remained interesting even to non-
drinkers (a bit different from the Head Fandom phenomenon of a few
years later).
At the (mostly West Coast/WesterCon) conventions I attended during
the '60s, I don't recall that drinking was viewed as anything but
a Do It Yourself project -- the concepts of "Con Suite" and "Open
Party" were not yet highly-developed, and neither the ConCom nor
other hosts (including those of the "semi-Closed" parties which
were the main item in the evenings) were _expected_ to provide
beer (or anything stronger, or even a lot of softdrinks). A few
did, which was greatly appreciated, but it was also understood
that most fans don't have much money, and that this ought to be no
hindrance to hosting a party; guests were expected to bring their
own whatever, and perhaps a bit to share.
I've read reports of drunken rowdiness at recent cons (often
conveniently ascribed to non-fan crashers), but I have seen
remarkably little drunkenness -- almost none, in fact -- at cons
over the past decade or so. Partly, this may be influenced by my
location (and inability to afford to travel far and often to cons)
-- most of the Southern California cons I attend are produced
more-or-less under the auspices of SCIFI, which downplays the use
of alcohol at its conventions, for various reasons.
That doesn't explain why I haven't seen anyone objectionably drunk
at Minicons over the past five or six years. There's generally
kegs of three or more different and excellent micro-brewery beers
in the consuite, along with Blog (which is alcoholic by
definition, when unmodified), and other alcoholic drinks are
available at a dozen or more of the open room parties. This, mind
you, is during the academic Spring Break (Easter weekend), and
attracts over 3,000 people, mostly young, some or many of whom
have little or no other contact with "fandom". Of course, after
an active convention gets well under way, it's often difficult to
tell whether noisy &/or somewhat-strange behavior is induced by
natural glandular secretions, alcohol, or other artificial
chemical modifiers.
Modern mundane technicalities -- increasingly stringent state and
local liquor laws, liability questions, insurance details & costs
-- provide ConComs with both excuses and reasons to refuse to
serve alcohol, and to discourage private Open/Bidding parties from
doing so. They can get away with this largely (I think) because
fandom, reflecting society in general, is moving gradually in the
direction of Puritanism and anti-hedonism in some areas, and
towards considering that offending other people's feelings (as
drinkers/drunks rather often do) can properly be considered
intolerable.
(If my wording sounds a bit ambiguous, there, it reflects my
feelings, which are the usual ones along the lines of "Anyone who
is more X than I am is Going Too Far", though I think people
should be discouraged from doing more than moderate drinking, not
prohibited from it, much less from drinking at all.)
Don Fitch
<fitc...@aol.com>
[Posted, as freeware/fanware, to rec.arts.sf.fandom and The
TimeBinders List.]
B. Vermo
In article <19970223083...@ladder02.news.aol.com>,
fitc...@aol.com (FitchDonS) wrote:
| .., it seemed to me that there was much less
|pressure to conform/drink than in the other (primarily adolescent
|male) social groups with which I was acquainted. It was perfectly
|OK not to drink (but not to say that no-one else should), and the
|company of most fan drinkers remained interesting even to non-
|drinkers
This meshes quite well with my own observations, but I have not
attended many small foreign (like US) cons. I have usually chatted
a bit with hotel staff at Worldcons, and according to them SF conventions
are nice because there is less extreme drunkenness and breaking of
furniture than they see with other kinds of conventions. I got an
understanding that the medical ones were particularily bad. The latter
might be due to the brib<BS><BS><BS><BS>hospitality of the medical
and pharmaceutical industries, I guess. Fen would brobably have gushed
down every bit as much free booze if some high-profit industry believed
they might gain market shares by offering it.
Although the Norwegian room-parties at Worldcons have never been any
kind of oasis of sobriety, my general impression is that people have
been at a reasonably civilized level and we have usually had both
beer and stronger drink to spare. But I would be concerned if the
same people were drinking the same way EVERY week-end. Most brains
and livers are able to cope with the occational party, but not with
any kind of constant high exposure to alcohol. Or fat, sugar, marihuana,
lack of exercice or whatever, all of which I have seen both moderate
and rather less sensible use of both in and outside fandom.
Dave Locke
b...@bigblue.no (B. Vermo) wordwhipped:
>fitc...@aol.com (FitchDonS) wrote:
>| .., it seemed to me that there was much less
>|pressure to conform/drink than in the other (primarily adolescent
>|male) social groups with which I was acquainted. It was perfectly
>|OK not to drink (but not to say that no-one else should), and the
>|company of most fan drinkers remained interesting even to non-
>|drinkers
>This meshes quite well with my own observations, but I have not
>attended many small foreign (like US) cons. I have usually chatted
>a bit with hotel staff at Worldcons, and according to them SF conventions
>are nice because there is less extreme drunkenness and breaking of
>furniture than they see with other kinds of conventions.
I've been to other kinds of conventions, and that observation holds
true with those I've been to. It also held true for the hotel staff
and Long Beach Police when I was on the concom for Westercon XXV.
>Fen would brobably have gushed down every bit as much free booze
>if some high-profit industry believed they might gain market shares
> by offering it.
I dunno. There are many conventions with 'free' booze in the consuite
for members of the con. I don't see that those fen would drink more
if some mundane group brought more free booze.
>Although the Norwegian room-parties at Worldcons have never been any
>kind of oasis of sobriety, my general impression is that people have
>been at a reasonably civilized level and we have usually had both
>beer and stronger drink to spare. But I would be concerned if the
>same people were drinking the same way EVERY week-end. Most brains
>and livers are able to cope with the occational party, but not with
>any kind of constant high exposure to alcohol. Or fat, sugar, marihuana,
>lack of exercice or whatever, all of which I have seen both moderate
>and rather less sensible use of both in and outside fandom.
I agree in general, and don't want to start some wildass spinoff to
the thread, but I've yet to encounter any proclamation arising out of
the "scientific method" (test, test, replicate, replicate) that
there's any danger from prolonged exposure to marihuana. I've heard
statements to this effect, but they've been socially generated and not
scientifically generated. Not to say that there aren't any, but the
last studies I looked at wound up stating that the only verifiable
problem with using marijuana per se was that it was illegal. I'm not
looking for personal opinions on this, but if anyone can quote a
source or three...
---
-----------Dave-------------------...@bigfoot.com-----------
David G. Bell
In article <5eq6pe$6...@camel2.mindspring.com>
dave...@bigfoot.com "Dave Locke" writes:
> I agree in general, and don't want to start some wildass spinoff to
> the thread, but I've yet to encounter any proclamation arising out of
> the "scientific method" (test, test, replicate, replicate) that
> there's any danger from prolonged exposure to marihuana. I've heard
> statements to this effect, but they've been socially generated and not
> scientifically generated. Not to say that there aren't any, but the
> last studies I looked at wound up stating that the only verifiable
> problem with using marijuana per se was that it was illegal. I'm not
> looking for personal opinions on this, but if anyone can quote a
> source or three...
I wouldn't be surprised if there were similar lung problems to those
from smoking tobacco, but I know that there are likely to be a lot of
differences in smoke chemistry which might lead to a different level of
effects.
But that sort of thing needs a long-term study.
--
David G. Bell -- Farmer, SF Fan, Filker, Furry, and Punslinger..
Arthur Hlavaty
Bernard Peek (b...@intersec.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: In article <856735...@zhochaka.demon.co.uk>, "David G. Bell"
: <db...@zhochaka.demon.co.uk> writes
: >I wouldn't be surprised if there were similar lung problems to those
: >from smoking tobacco, but I know that there are likely to be a lot of
: >differences in smoke chemistry which might lead to a different level of
: >effects.
: In the absence of evidence to the contrary it's a safe bet that the risk
: of cancer and other problems is no lower than in smoking plain tobacco.
: It don't think it would be easy to get research funding to prove it
: either way.
I've always assumed that if the FDA had ever gotten a single mouse to get
cancer from marijuana, it would have been announced as Major News. So
presumably, they haven't even though they may be well on their way to
breeding a strain of mice that get cancer on command.
--
Arthur D. Hlavaty hla...@panix.com
Church of the SuperGenius In Wile E. We Trust
\\\ E-zine available on request. ///
Dan Evens
B. Vermo wrote:
> Fen would brobably have gushed
> down every bit as much free booze if some high-profit industry believed
> they might gain market shares by offering it.
Maybe, or maybe not. I attend a regional every year where there is
a hospitality suite called the Dead Dragon Inn. One year, a well
advertised brand name of beer with a dragon-like sort of critter
as their symbol provided this suite with about 20 cases of beer
for free. The beer actually went quite slowly, even though the
suite was giving it away free.
`Course, this may have had something to do with the fact they
were also giving away dragon's blood.
"What is it?"
"Dragon's blood."
"What's in it?"
"Dragon's blood."
"And?"
"Ice."
--
Standard disclaimers apply.
I don't buy from people who advertise by e-mail.
I don't buy from their ISPs.
Dan Evens
Dan Evens
Dave Locke wrote:
> I agree in general, and don't want to start some wildass spinoff to
> the thread, but I've yet to encounter any proclamation arising out of
> the "scientific method" (test, test, replicate, replicate) that
> there's any danger from prolonged exposure to marihuana.
The effects on your lungs are APPROX as bad as tobacco. It's
ROUGHLY as bad carcinogenically. Hard to gauge exactly as
there is such wide variation in strength, smoking method,
frequency, and reliability of reporting.
Seth Breidbart
In article <3311DA...@hydro.on.ca>,
Dan Evens <dan....@hydro.on.ca> wrote:
>Dave Locke wrote:
>> I agree in general, and don't want to start some wildass spinoff to
>> the thread, but I've yet to encounter any proclamation arising out of
>> the "scientific method" (test, test, replicate, replicate) that
>> there's any danger from prolonged exposure to marihuana.
>The effects on your lungs are APPROX as bad as tobacco. It's
>ROUGHLY as bad carcinogenically. Hard to gauge exactly as
>there is such wide variation in strength, smoking method,
>frequency, and reliability of reporting.
How much tobacco is there in a pack of cigarettes? How much marijuana
does a "typical" (whatever that means) user smoke in a week?
Anyway, society seems to have decided that people ought to be allowed
to cause themselves the amount of harm produced by tobacco, with
limits on how much they can harm others by its use.
Seth
Bernard Peek
>I wouldn't be surprised if there were similar lung problems to those
>from smoking tobacco, but I know that there are likely to be a lot of
>differences in smoke chemistry which might lead to a different level of
>effects.
In the absence of evidence to the contrary it's a safe bet that the risk
of cancer and other problems is no lower than in smoking plain tobacco.
It don't think it would be easy to get research funding to prove it
either way.
--
Bernard Peek
gram
David G. Bell (db...@zhochaka.demon.co.uk) wrote:
:
: I wouldn't be surprised if there were similar lung problems to those
: differences in smoke chemistry which might lead to a different level of
: effects.
As has been pointed out by a number of folks over the years, you'll
find very few people who will consume 20-40 joints per day the way a
tobacco smoker such as myself will consume cigarettes.
Ward Griffiths
--
Q: What do you call a christian who accidently read the bible with his
brain turned on? A: An atheist
Alan Braggins
b...@bigblue.no (B. Vermo) writes:
> This meshes quite well with my own observations, but I have not
> attended many small foreign (like US) cons. I have usually chatted
> a bit with hotel staff at Worldcons, and according to them SF conventions
> are nice because there is less extreme drunkenness and breaking of
> furniture than they see with other kinds of conventions.
I've also heard that in general the other kinds of convention have
more money, including buying more drinks at whatever prices the hotel
normally charges, paying higher room rates, etc.
As a result, the opinions of the hotel staff (who deal with the
problems) and the hotel management (who get the money) about which
types of conventions are preferable may vary. If the rowdy convention
goers also tip lavishly, the opinions may be closer.
Minx Kelly, Lego Goddess of Phobos
FitchDonS wrote:
>
> Modern mundane technicalities -- increasingly stringent state and
> local liquor laws, liability questions, insurance details & costs
> -- provide ConComs with both excuses and reasons to refuse to
> serve alcohol, and to discourage private Open/Bidding parties from
> doing so. They can get away with this largely (I think) because
> fandom, reflecting society in general, is moving gradually in the
> direction of Puritanism and anti-hedonism in some areas, and
> towards considering that offending other people's feelings (as
> drinkers/drunks rather often do) can properly be considered
> intolerable.
>
> (If my wording sounds a bit ambiguous, there, it reflects my
> feelings, which are the usual ones along the lines of "Anyone who
> is more X than I am is Going Too Far", though I think people
> should be discouraged from doing more than moderate drinking, not
> prohibited from it, much less from drinking at all.)
>
> Don Fitch
> <fitc...@aol.com>
Now I'm not sure I see it as you do, as a move towards puritanism or
anti-hedonism. Speaking as an out-and-about hedonist I have found
increasingly greater acceptance of the hedonistic lifestyles at
conventions so long as we are reasonably discreet about things. Such
discretion was NOT the case at Minicon last year with one or two
negative incidents, but such IS the case with quite a few conventions,
(we had a fantastic turnout for our Bondage 101 panel at Windycon last
year). I think it points more towards the maturation of fandom in
general. I have seen a large portion of fandom, previously, the younger
generation of it, now in their middle age years with kids and obviously,
more maturity and responsiblity. We hedonists are out and about, and
expect a certain tolerance if not acceptance, so long as we have enough
discretion not to offend, which correlates to your own conclusions in
that regard. I can certainly expect to have a small discreet private
party in my room, but if I wanted to go about flogging people in public
a an all-ages convention, I'd be out of line, and offensive. At the
same time fully-clothed massage sessions happen in hotel lobbies at
almost any convention. equally hedonistic in my opinion, but one is
discreet and inoffensive the other is rude and foists an unfair
explicitness on the casual observer or innocent bystander.
There is certainly a younger element now with trends most shocking to
some, and commonplace to others. Hedonism doesn't necessarily correlate
to irresponsiblity and certainly isn't comparable to alcohol abuse in my
opinion.
--
* Posting this sig is part of my parole agreement
* Minx Kelly, artist, author, poet, legowench
* at minx...@xnet.com and less frequently at minx...@olimits.com
* http://www.xnet.com/~minxkely/ for adults only!
* http://www.xnet.com/~countzi/2ndchild.html fun for all ages
* currently suffering from tabularasaphobia
* and roaming where the phosphor winds blow me
Minx Kelly, Lego Goddess of Phobos
Dan Evens wrote:
>
> Dave Locke wrote:
> > I agree in general, and don't want to start some wildass spinoff to
> > the thread, but I've yet to encounter any proclamation arising out of
> > the "scientific method" (test, test, replicate, replicate) that
> > there's any danger from prolonged exposure to marihuana.
>
> The effects on your lungs are APPROX as bad as tobacco. It's
> ROUGHLY as bad carcinogenically. Hard to gauge exactly as
> there is such wide variation in strength, smoking method,
> frequency, and reliability of reporting.
>
can honestly say that it helped me deal with cancer therapy, and I never
smoked a single joint. There is always tea and pills, hard to get, but
not impossible, and when you can't get an appetite any other way, I'll
take the chance that in the long run THC might eventually be harmful.
Heck, I smoked catnip for migraines when I couldn't stand tea and it
helped... don't get me wrong, I don't think EVERYONE should be lighting
up ANYTHING. smoking is a horrible way to ingest anything, especially
medicine, but sometimes it IS worth the risk.
Minx Kelly, Lego Goddess of Phobos
Dan Evens wrote:
>
> B. Vermo wrote:
> > Fen would brobably have gushed
> > down every bit as much free booze if some high-profit industry believed
> > they might gain market shares by offering it.
>
> Maybe, or maybe not. I attend a regional every year where there is
> a hospitality suite called the Dead Dragon Inn. One year, a well
> advertised brand name of beer with a dragon-like sort of critter
> as their symbol provided this suite with about 20 cases of beer
> for free. The beer actually went quite slowly, even though the
> suite was giving it away free.
>
> `Course, this may have had something to do with the fact they
> were also giving away dragon's blood.
>
> "What is it?"
>
> "Dragon's blood."
>
> "What's in it?"
>
> "Dragon's blood."
>
> "And?"
>
> "Ice."
>
oook ook ook! hehehe I had the pleasure of visiting the DDI at Winnapeg
worldcon a few years back. I'd turn down even the best tully for
dragon's blood. (I still have the "friend of DDI" card on ym fridge,
now how can we get them to come visit for a Minicon?!!!!
Chuck Lipsig
"Minx Kelly, Lego Goddess of Phobos" <minx...@xnet.com> wrote:
>True, but marijuana, unlike tobacco has redeeming medicinalbenefits
Actually, tobacco -- specifically, the nicotine -- does have some
redeeming medicinal benefits, especially with regard to dealing with
attention deficit disorders. Tobacco may also have a role in preventing
or slowing the onset of Alzheimer's Disease. Thing is, tobacco is getting
such a bum rap that few want to investigate such things and fewer are
willing to report them
Hmmm.... I have a family history of Alzheimer's, but not of cancer.
Maybe I should take up smoking. Or chewing nicotine gum.
Chuck Lipsig lip...@atlantic.net Gainesville, FL
Clones. Deja vu. You get the .sig.
rdk...@facstaff.wisc.edu
In article <5f411c$m...@news.atlantic.net>, lip...@atlantic.net (Chuck
Lipsig) wrote:
>Tobacco may also have a role in preventing
>or slowing the onset of Alzheimer's Disease. Thing is, tobacco is getting
>such a bum rap that few want to investigate such things and fewer are
>willing to report them
It's unnecessary to invoke tobacco's "bum rap" to explain little
research into any good side effects it may have. (By the way, I
think you mean "known bad effects" not "bum rap"; a "bum rap" is
one which is not true).
Consider:
(1) No company can make an exclusive profit out of finding a
medical benefit to tobacco. Research would have to be
long term and with large populations (because any benefits
that are easy to find would have been noticed by now). Who
would pay for such expensive research, when it leaves them
worse off than their competitors (who would derive the same
benefits but not have to carry the cost of the research).
This is why it was so difficult to get funding for research
into whether or not aspirin can prevent heart attacks: the
drug companies were reluctant to invest money in research because
as an investment they were far better off just, for example,
buying bonds and putting them in the bank.
(2) It's pretty widely accepted that tobacco kills.
Looking for a beneficial effect is like trying to find
a benefit of arsenic: how effective would it have to be
in delaying the onset of Alzheimer's, in how many people,
to justify the enormous number of people it will certainly kill?
Paul Ciszek
"Minx Kelly, Lego Goddess of Phobos" <minx...@xnet.com> writes:
>Dan Evens wrote:
>>
>> Dave Locke wrote:
>> > I agree in general, and don't want to start some wildass spinoff to
>> > the thread, but I've yet to encounter any proclamation arising out of
>> > the "scientific method" (test, test, replicate, replicate) that
>> > there's any danger from prolonged exposure to marihuana.
>>
>> The effects on your lungs are APPROX as bad as tobacco. It's
>> ROUGHLY as bad carcinogenically. Hard to gauge exactly as
>> there is such wide variation in strength, smoking method,
>> frequency, and reliability of reporting.
>>
>True, but marijuana, unlike tobacco has redeeming medicinalbenefits, I
>can honestly say that it helped me deal with cancer therapy, and I never
>smoked a single joint. There is always tea and pills, hard to get, but
>not impossible, and when you can't get an appetite any other way, I'll
>take the chance that in the long run THC might eventually be harmful.
But tobacco was smoked by Native Americans. Surely they wouldn't do
anything unnatural or unhealthy?
Tim Illingworth
In article <rdkeir-2702...@news.doit.wisc.edu>
rdk...@facstaff.wisc.edu writes:
> Looking for a beneficial effect is like trying to find
> a benefit of arsenic: how effective would it have to be
> in delaying the onset of Alzheimer's, in how many people,
> to justify the enormous number of people it will certainly kill?
"Mithradates, he died old".
All the Best,
Tim
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Illingworth t...@smof.demon.co.uk Go not to Usenet for advice, for
Chessington, tim...@cix.compulink.co.uk they will say both 'No' and 'Yes'
Surrey, UK 10014...@compuserve.com and 'Try Another Newsgroup'
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bernard Peek
In article <331544...@xnet.com>, "Minx Kelly, Lego Goddess of
Phobos" <minx...@xnet.com> writes
>
>> The effects on your lungs are APPROX as bad as tobacco. It's
>> ROUGHLY as bad carcinogenically. Hard to gauge exactly as
>> there is such wide variation in strength, smoking method,
>> frequency, and reliability of reporting.
>>
>True, but marijuana, unlike tobacco has redeeming medicinalbenefits, I
>can honestly say that it helped me deal with cancer therapy, and I never
>smoked a single joint. There is always tea and pills, hard to get, but
>not impossible, and when you can't get an appetite any other way, I'll
>take the chance that in the long run THC might eventually be harmful.
There's a lot of anecdotal evidence that cannabis has relatively few
side effects, and doesn't normally cause acute poisoning. The evidence
comes in the main from the time when it wasn't illegal to use it. It
might still be toxic enough to be banned under modern legislation.
One person in a million having a bad reaction to it might be enough to
disqualify it from consideration under current laws. That's a toxicity
level that can't be detected with anecdotal evidence, it needs detailed
statistical analysis in a controlled trial situation. That would be very
difficult to do because of the political fallout from a test that
involved prescribing an illegal drug to thousands of people.
There are some computer modelling techniques that could be used to
analyse its structure and likely effects. There are lots of problems
with that though. The techniques (as I understand the situation, and I
haven't worked in this field for years) are good at confirming toxicity
if a specific mechanism is suspected, but not good at the initial
detection. All natural materials contain vast numbers of chemicals, many
of which are toxic. (The usual example quoted in the literature is the
potato, which has unacceptably high levels of toxic alkaloids, and is
therefore unfit for human consumption.)
--
Bernard Peek
Chuck Lipsig
rdk...@facstaff.wisc.edu wrote:
>In article <5f411c$m...@news.atlantic.net>, lip...@atlantic.net (Chuck
>Lipsig) wrote:
>>Tobacco may also have a role in preventing
>>or slowing the onset of Alzheimer's Disease. Thing is, tobacco is getting
>>such a bum rap that few want to investigate such things and fewer are
>>willing to report them
>It's unnecessary to invoke tobacco's "bum rap" to explain little
>research into any good side effects it may have. (By the way, I
>think you mean "known bad effects" not "bum rap"; a "bum rap" is
>one which is not true).
I didn't mean bum rap in terms of side effects -- heck I work so much
with death demographics that I know it as well as anyone (Front page
article in today's Gainesville Scum ^h^h^h^h Sun: 20 percent of deaths in
Florida are attributible to tobacco use. I meant bum rap in terms of the
idea that tobacco use had no postive effects -- even if they're outweighed
by the bad.
>Consider:
>(1) No company can make an exclusive profit out of finding a
> medical benefit to tobacco. Research would have to be
> long term and with large populations (because any benefits
> that are easy to find would have been noticed by now). Who
> would pay for such expensive research, when it leaves them
> worse off than their competitors (who would derive the same
> benefits but not have to carry the cost of the research).
> This is why it was so difficult to get funding for research
> into whether or not aspirin can prevent heart attacks: the
> drug companies were reluctant to invest money in research because
> as an investment they were far better off just, for example,
> buying bonds and putting them in the bank.
And yet aspirin-research "is" being done. There's that bum rap --
should we, call it tobaccophobia? 8>) -- again.
Actually, from what I understand, some tobacco research is being done,
but scientists are afraid of ruining their reputations by publising
anything positive.
>(2) It's pretty widely accepted that tobacco kills.
> Looking for a beneficial effect is like trying to find
> a benefit of arsenic: how effective would it have to be
> in delaying the onset of Alzheimer's, in how many people,
> to justify the enormous number of people it will certainly kill?
Which means that if nicotine has positive effects, we need research on
delivery systems that lessen or eliminate the ills of smoking.
Perhaps I mis-write in suggesting that smoking gets a bum rap. It's
nicotine, because of its relationship to cigarettes that is getting such a
bum rap, that society is afraid to find any positive use for it.
Ah, well.
Chuck Lipsig lip...@atlantic.net Gainesville, FL
It's not just a .sig -- It's a .lipsig.
Avedon Carol
On Thu, 27 Feb 1997 00:23:55 -0800, "Minx Kelly, Lego Goddess of
Phobos" <minx...@xnet.com> wrote:
>Dan Evens wrote:
>> The effects on your lungs are APPROX as bad as tobacco. It's
>> ROUGHLY as bad carcinogenically. Hard to gauge exactly as
>> there is such wide variation in strength, smoking method,
>> frequency, and reliability of reporting.
>>
>True, but marijuana, unlike tobacco has redeeming medicinalbenefits, I
>can honestly say that it helped me deal with cancer therapy, and I never
>smoked a single joint. There is always tea and pills, hard to get, but
>not impossible, and when you can't get an appetite any other way, I'll
>take the chance that in the long run THC might eventually be harmful.
Some current research seems to indicate that nicotine has an
ameliorative effect on Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, and
certain kinds of colon disease. It's up to you to decide whether the
cure is worse than the disease...
>Heck, I smoked catnip for migraines when I couldn't stand tea and it
>helped... don't get me wrong, I don't think EVERYONE should be lighting
>up ANYTHING. smoking is a horrible way to ingest anything, especially
>medicine, but sometimes it IS worth the risk.
I'm not sure I'd want Alzheimer's patients to be smoking, especially
if it's not something they've already built up safety habits for over
many years of use. Nevertheless, as far as drug delivery systems are
concerned, smoking is actually a pretty good fast-acting, easily
controllable system (think of the difference between smoking pot and
eating it). In nicotine trials they used subcutaneous injection - not
practical for regular use, obviously - and nicotine patches, which
seem like a sensible compromise.
See, you can't even trust tobacco to be a Perfect Tool of the Devil.
A lot of otherwise toxic materials have medicinal benefits, and the
evil weed is apparently on that list. Myself, I got cured of a
disease by being made radioactive for a couple of weeks, but it's not
something I'd want to do as a regular thing...
--
Avedon
ave...@cix.co.uk
Note: Remove ".spamout." from reply field for e-mail.
David G. Bell
In article <3318416f...@news.demon.co.uk>
ave...@cix.spamout.co.uk "Avedon Carol" writes:
> See, you can't even trust tobacco to be a Perfect Tool of the Devil.
> A lot of otherwise toxic materials have medicinal benefits, and the
> evil weed is apparently on that list. Myself, I got cured of a
> disease by being made radioactive for a couple of weeks, but it's not
> something I'd want to do as a regular thing...
Avedon, we're _all_ radioactive.
Check out Carbon-14 for a starting point.
Loren MacGregor
On Fri, 28 Feb 1997 18:47:55 GMT, did ave...@cix.spamout.co.uk (Avedon
Carol) really say:
>See, you can't even trust tobacco to be a Perfect Tool of the Devil.
>A lot of otherwise toxic materials have medicinal benefits, and the
>evil weed is apparently on that list. Myself, I got cured of a
>disease by being made radioactive for a couple of weeks, but it's not
>something I'd want to do as a regular thing...
I may be misrembering this, but I seem to recall a researcher once
telling me that part of the reason cigarettes were so bad for you was
not the tobacco itself, but the additives used to ensure that
cigarettes burned evenly, that the papers had certain qualities, that
a cigarette would stay lit when you set it down in an ashtray, etc.
The latter quality was the reason Green Tortoise for a time allowed
marijuana cigarettes on board the bus and not tobacco, because when
you dropped a joint it went out, but when you dropped a ciggy it
stayed lit, and could set fire to the mattresses in the bus.
-- LJM
lmac...@greenheart.com / The Churn Works
http://www.metacentre.com/
churn...@metacentre.com
Gary Farber
In <857204...@zhochaka.demon.co.uk> David G. Bell <db...@zhochaka.demon.co.uk> wrote:
[. . .]
: Avedon, we're _all_ radioactive.
: Check out Carbon-14 for a starting point.
While Avedon has no more of a science degree than I, I'm confident she's
well-aware of this; she was, of course, referring to specifically being
zapped by an Evil (well, Good) Ray Machine (or being administered
chemicals; I didn't catch the details).
I love to use technical language like "Ray Machine:": it worked for E.E.
Smith, y'know. ;-)
--
-- Gary Farber gfa...@panix.com
Copyright 1997 Brooklyn, NY, USA
B. Vermo
In article <rdkeir-2702...@news.doit.wisc.edu>,
rdk...@facstaff.wisc.edu wrote:
|
|(2) It's pretty widely accepted that tobacco kills.
| Looking for a beneficial effect is like trying to find
| a benefit of arsenic: how effective would it have to be
| in delaying the onset of Alzheimer's, in how many people,
| to justify the enormous number of people it will certainly kill?
This depends entirely on what you mean by "tobacco kills".
Certainly it is possible to ingest enough raw tobacco to die from
nicotine poisoning. It does not even take much. About as much as
the amount of potato leaves you can eat before being poisoned.
But much of the highly target-oriented research has been set up to
prove a connection between cigarette smoking and several serious
and fatal diseases. There is a very major difference between
cigarettes and tobacco in general. Before the introduction of cigarettes
around the previous turn of the century, diseases we today see as
caused by cigarette smoking were highly unusual even among heavy
pipe and cigar smokers. Besides, addiction to tobacco was much
rarer and easier to break. The chemical processes which cigarette
tobacco are subjected to combined with the custom of inhaling the
smoke of the cigarette into the lungs seems a highly plausible
explanation for most of those differences. Lung cancer is for
instance no more common among pipe or cigar smokers than among
non-smokers. There are also a number of documented benefits, but
they are minor compared to the dangers of cigarette smoking.
One interesting item is that we seem to have more suicides among
non-smokers. The mechanism is not discovered yet.
As for arsenic, its beneficial medical effects have been known for
a long time. It is effective against vertigo, and has been used by
mountain climbers. It is used against some skin problems, and was
an important part of the first effective treatment of protozoic
infections. Nothing is healthy or poisonous by itself. It is
always a question of amounts and conditions.
David G. Bell
> In <857204...@zhochaka.demon.co.uk> David G. Bell
> <db...@zhochaka.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> [. . .]
>
> : Avedon, we're _all_ radioactive.
>
> : Check out Carbon-14 for a starting point.
>
> While Avedon has no more of a science degree than I, I'm confident she's
> well-aware of this; she was, of course, referring to specifically being
> zapped by an Evil (well, Good) Ray Machine (or being administered
> chemicals; I didn't catch the details).
>
> I love to use technical language like "Ray Machine:": it worked for E.E.
> Smith, y'know. ;-)
I don't think Avedon is dumb either, but the implication that
"radioactive" is an artifical, un-natural, or "evil" state deserves
occasional derision.
And I think Avedon is more likely to grin, and say "You know what I
meant, dammit", than plot something lingering with boiling oil in it
somewhere.
I hope.
Gary Farber
In <857418...@zhochaka.demon.co.uk> David G. Bell
: I don't think Avedon is dumb either, but the implication that
: occasional derision.
Agreed; I do it myself with some regularity -- in fact, I just did so
yesterday. :-)
: And I think Avedon is more likely to grin, and say "You know what I
: meant, dammit", than plot something lingering with boiling oil in it
: somewhere.
: I hope.
I think she plots the boiling oil thing for me occasionally when I fuck up
with her. :-)
Avedon Carol
On 2 Mar 1997 18:15:49 -0500, gfa...@panix.com (Gary Farber) wrote:
>In <857204...@zhochaka.demon.co.uk> David G. Bell <db...@zhochaka.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>[. . .]
>
>: Avedon, we're _all_ radioactive.
>
>: Check out Carbon-14 for a starting point.
>
>While Avedon has no more of a science degree than I, I'm confident she's
>well-aware of this; she was, of course, referring to specifically being
>zapped by an Evil (well, Good) Ray Machine (or being administered
>chemicals; I didn't catch the details).
A magic pill. It comes in a solid lead pill-bottle and they have all
this major safety-ritual for taking it, and then for the next two
weeks you have to sleep alone. The bit I didn't understand was why I
wasn't supposed to go into grocery stores.
>
>I love to use technical language like "Ray Machine:": it worked for E.E.
>Smith, y'know. ;-)
--
Avedon
ave...@cix.co.uk
Note: Remove ".spamout" from reply field for e-mail.
Rob Hansen
>On 2 Mar 1997 18:15:49 -0500, gfa...@panix.com (Gary Farber) wrote:
>
>>In <857204...@zhochaka.demon.co.uk> David G. Bell <db...@zhochaka.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>[. . .]
>>
>>: Avedon, we're _all_ radioactive.
>>
>>: Check out Carbon-14 for a starting point.
>>
>>While Avedon has no more of a science degree than I, I'm confident she's
>>well-aware of this; she was, of course, referring to specifically being
>>zapped by an Evil (well, Good) Ray Machine (or being administered
>>chemicals; I didn't catch the details).
>
>A magic pill. It comes in a solid lead pill-bottle and they have all
>this major safety-ritual for taking it, and then for the next two
>weeks you have to sleep alone. The bit I didn't understand was why I
>wasn't supposed to go into grocery stores.
It's probably the bar-code readers. One inadvertant zap from you at
the checkout and the person in front of you gets charged for 47 cans
of kangaroo curry and 23 cartons of faggots in gravy, when all they
had in their basket was a bunch of asparagus.
Rob Hansen
================================================
My Home Page: http://www.fiawol.demon.co.uk/rob/
Feminists Against Censorship:
http://www.fiawol.demon.co.uk/FAC/
Chuck Lipsig
r...@fiawol.demon.co.uk (Rob Hansen) wrote:
>It's probably the bar-code readers. One inadvertant zap from you at
>the checkout and the person in front of you gets charged for 47 cans
>of kangaroo curry and 23 cartons of faggots in gravy,
OK, I'm stranded here in America, and even with an interest in BritComs,
I'm missing this one. "Faggots in gravy" are ...?
>when all they
>had in their basket was a bunch of asparagus.
Anyone who actually buys asparagus deserves what they get. 8>)
Chuck Lipsig lip...@atlantic.net Gainesville, FL
Gay cannibal jokes being filed along side of cheap sheep jokes.
Avedon Carol
On 6 Mar 1997 10:10:42 GMT, aaa@keith (A^3) wrote:
>There's this problem in the UK with getting reliable reports
>on the effects of marijuana: most of the tobacco effects are
>taken from a bunch of doctors who've been reporting their
>smoking habits for twenty years. Since smoking marijuana
>would get them struck off, it'd be difficult to get proper
>reports on frequency etc. :-)
There's this even bigger problem that marijuana here is usually mixed
with tobacco.
Gary Farber
In <332f0c5a...@news.demon.co.uk> Avedon Carol
<ave...@cix.spamout.co.uk> wrote:
: On 6 Mar 1997 10:10:42 GMT, aaa@keith (A^3) wrote:
: >There's this problem in the UK with getting reliable reports
: >on the effects of marijuana: most of the tobacco effects are
: >taken from a bunch of doctors who've been reporting their
: >smoking habits for twenty years. Since smoking marijuana
: >would get them struck off, it'd be difficult to get proper
: >reports on frequency etc. :-)
: There's this even bigger problem that marijuana here is usually mixed
: with tobacco.
I would, of course, never do anything illegal, or unhealthy, or unwise,
but hypothetically, if a hypothetical visiting American visited a
hypothetical Britain, he might hypothetically have noticed this the one
hypothetical time he hypothetically was offered a hypothetical chance to
pollute his hypothetical lungs in a hypothetical Leeds, and he might
hypothetically have been amused at hypothetically being led to
hypothetically do such a hypothetically unhealthy thing.
This has nothing in practice to do with anyone I know, of course, and I'm
well aware of the Dangers of Drugs.
Morgan
In article <5fuu6k$7...@news.atlantic.net>, Chuck Lipsig
<lip...@atlantic.net> writes
>r...@fiawol.demon.co.uk (Rob Hansen) wrote:
>
>
>>It's probably the bar-code readers. One inadvertant zap from you at
>>the checkout and the person in front of you gets charged for 47 cans
>>of kangaroo curry and 23 cartons of faggots in gravy,
>
> OK, I'm stranded here in America, and even with an interest in BritComs,
>I'm missing this one. "Faggots in gravy" are ...?
Faggots are meatballs, quite large, and made with various cheap fillers.
Best served with mash and thick meaty gravy...
--
Morgan
"Nunc demum intellego," dixit Winnie ille Pu. "Stultus et
delusus fui," dixit "et ursus sine ullo cerebro sum."
Rob Hansen
On Sun, 09 Mar 1997 17:03:02 GMT, lip...@atlantic.net (Chuck Lipsig)
wrote:
>r...@fiawol.demon.co.uk (Rob Hansen) wrote:
>
>
>>It's probably the bar-code readers. One inadvertant zap from you at
>>the checkout and the person in front of you gets charged for 47 cans
>>of kangaroo curry and 23 cartons of faggots in gravy,
>
> OK, I'm stranded here in America, and even with an interest in BritComs,
>I'm missing this one. "Faggots in gravy" are ...?
Over here, a faggot is a large meatball, usually eaten with peas and
gravy (which may explain why, even though US slang often catches on
over here, the UK gay community hasn't noticably embraced 'faggot'). A
couple of years back, I bought I carton, mainly so I could take the
lid to the US for the amusement of local fans, and so got to try them.
They tasted pretty disgusting.
Jim Trash
>
> OK, I'm stranded here in America, and even with an interest in BritComs,
>I'm missing this one. "Faggots in gravy" are ...?
Featured in the new hardcore release
'It happened in Lancashire'
Two young sailors on shore leave discover new heights of culinary
sophistication when lumps appear on their dishes smothered in lashings
of delicious onion gravy.
I do hope this round brown thing I'm eating is munched up meat, fried
with herbs and bread says our hero with a suspicious look in his eyes.
So what do you think it is if it isn't, asks the fierce cafe owner.
Well it looks a bit like, well, you know, our hero gestures toward the
toilet door with his head.
The cafe owner smiles, would you be able to tell the difference from the
taste ?
Well, OK, you got a point says the bright young lad and tucks in with
great relish and patrotism in his heart.
It may taste crap but at least he's following in a great tradition of
centuries of eating crap.
Tempted yet ?
http://www.scream.demon.co.uk Jim Trash
Richard Brandt
Rob Hansen wrote:
> Over here, a faggot is a large meatball, usually eaten with peas and
> gravy (which may explain why, even though US slang often catches on
> over here, the UK gay community hasn't noticably embraced 'faggot'). A
> couple of years back, I bought I carton, mainly so I could take the
> lid to the US for the amusement of local fans, and so got to try them.
> They tasted pretty disgusting.
Good. I was wondering why you'd pour gravy over a carton of cigarettes.
Or a pile of kindling.
--
=============================================
http://rgfn.epcc.edu/users/af541/virtual.htm
"People have been known to learn to fly these machines
with no assistance from commercial airlines, and could
in fact fly a cooler of motel chitlin's anywhere
in the country." -- Philo
P Nielsen Hayden
Richard Brandt (rsbr...@cris.com) wrote:
: Rob Hansen wrote:
: > Over here, a faggot is a large meatball, usually eaten with peas and
: > gravy (which may explain why, even though US slang often catches on
: > over here, the UK gay community hasn't noticably embraced 'faggot'). A
: > couple of years back, I bought I carton, mainly so I could take the
: > lid to the US for the amusement of local fans, and so got to try them.
: > They tasted pretty disgusting.
: Good. I was wondering why you'd pour gravy over a carton of cigarettes.
: Or a pile of kindling.
<Psst. These Brits make this stuff up as they go along. I've spied on them
and I KNOW. We take notes and try to follow along, but they just come up
with new wrinkles.
<Like, the same word meaning both _cigarettes_ and _meatballs_? Like sure I
believe that. No, they're having us on. Same with their ridiculous street
addresses. It's all a big gag. Believe me, the Welsh are the worst. They
dream up this stuff during secret conferences in what they are amused to
have convinced us they call the "loo." Actually, you don't want to know
what they really call it. Best not to find out.>
-----
Patrick Nielsen Hayden : p...@tor.com : http://www.panix.com/~pnh
Ulrika O'Brien
lip...@atlantic.net (Chuck Lipsig) wrote:
> OK, I'm stranded here in America, and even with an interest in BritComs,
>I'm missing this one. "Faggots in gravy" are ...?
..a lot of fun on a Saturday night?
--
"Criticism is the only known antidote to error." -- David Brin
Ulrika O'Brien***ulr...@aol.com***caveat lector
Ulrika O'Brien
awnb...@panix.com (Michael R Weholt) wrote:
> It's just appalling to me they don't teach this stuff in our
>public schools anymore.
Uh huh. What idiot was it said posting skills don't translate
to fiction skills, again?
Morgan
In article <5g2jmi$i...@panix2.panix.com>, P Nielsen Hayden
<p...@panix.com> writes
><Like, the same word meaning both _cigarettes_ and _meatballs_? Like sure I
>believe that.
Well, they are two different words...fags for cigarettes, faggots for
meatballs.
Kindling for wood fires, of course, is both.
Rob Hansen
On 10 Mar 1997 22:31:30 -0500, p...@panix.com (P Nielsen Hayden) wrote:
><Psst. These Brits make this stuff up as they go along. I've spied on them
>and I KNOW. We take notes and try to follow along, but they just come up
>with new wrinkles.
>
><Like, the same word meaning both _cigarettes_ and _meatballs_? Like sure I
>believe that. No, they're having us on. Same with their ridiculous street
>addresses. It's all a big gag. Believe me, the Welsh are the worst. They
>dream up this stuff during secret conferences in what they are amused to
>have convinced us they call the "loo."
This is true. There isn't actually a Welsh language at all it's just a
collection of amusing and improbably difficult to pronounce sounds
that we string together in absurd combinations so that we can laugh at
the English as they struggle to get their tongues around them. Hours
of fun for all the family. Or, as we call it in Wales, the
llynddaercynwmllgogogoch.
P Nielsen Hayden
Rob Hansen (r...@fiawol.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: On 10 Mar 1997 22:31:30 -0500, p...@panix.com (P Nielsen Hayden) wrote:
: ><Psst. These Brits make this stuff up as they go along. I've spied on them
: >and I KNOW. We take notes and try to follow along, but they just come up
: >with new wrinkles.
: >
: ><Like, the same word meaning both _cigarettes_ and _meatballs_? Like sure I
: >believe that. No, they're having us on. Same with their ridiculous street
: >addresses. It's all a big gag. Believe me, the Welsh are the worst. They
: >dream up this stuff during secret conferences in what they are amused to
: >have convinced us they call the "loo."
: This is true. There isn't actually a Welsh language at all it's just a
: collection of amusing and improbably difficult to pronounce sounds
: that we string together in absurd combinations so that we can laugh at
: the English as they struggle to get their tongues around them. Hours
: of fun for all the family. Or, as we call it in Wales, the
: llynddaercynwmllgogogoch.
Of course, the Welsh "language" is sponsored by the signmaker's guild. I
have never seen wider, longer highway signs than those found in Wales.
Generally speaking they're bilingual, and usually look something like this:
YIELD
-----
YGOWERNCYWNDDAERCHLYGAULLYN
Alan Braggins
ave...@cix.spamout.co.uk (Avedon Carol) writes:
> There's this even bigger problem that marijuana here is usually mixed
> with tobacco.
small sample (offered for immediate shared consumption, not for sale),
and does seem to be atypical.
Robert Sneddon (SEE .SIG TO RE
In article <5g2jmi$i...@panix2.panix.com> p...@panix.com "P Nielsen Hayden" writes:
> [Clip] Believe me, the Welsh are the worst. They
> dream up this stuff during secret conferences in what they are amused to
> have convinced us they call the "loo." Actually, you don't want to know
> what they really call it. Best not to find out.>
Khazi? Bog? Lavvie? I did read the concordance discussion about
Turtledove's "The Two Georges" where "jakes" was suggested as the common
British term for what is politely termed the "W.C." (You have wondered,
perhaps, why we thought Mr. Fields was so funny? Now you know...) "Jakes"
*was* used by the lower classes in the Victorian period, but has largely
fallen out of favour with the sitting public.
BTW what *is* aluminum? Aluminium Lite?
--
*** SPAM BLOCKED ADDRESS *** To reply, remove the string "_nospam_" from
the address above. If you don't, mail will bounce and I'll never see it.
This is done to prevent spammers from junk-emailing me.
Robert (nojay) Sneddon
Kate Schaefer
In a previous article, mor...@sidhen.demon.co.uk (Morgan) says:
>
>In article <5fuu6k$7...@news.atlantic.net>, Chuck Lipsig
><lip...@atlantic.net> writes
>>r...@fiawol.demon.co.uk (Rob Hansen) wrote:
>>
>>
>>>It's probably the bar-code readers. One inadvertant zap from you at
>>>the checkout and the person in front of you gets charged for 47 cans
>>>of kangaroo curry and 23 cartons of faggots in gravy,
>>
>> OK, I'm stranded here in America, and even with an interest in BritComs,
>>I'm missing this one. "Faggots in gravy" are ...?
>
>
>Faggots are meatballs, quite large, and made with various cheap fillers.
>Best served with mash and thick meaty gravy...
Okay, you other Brits: is Morgan having us on, or is this true?
I assumed Rob was making up humorous food-like names.
--
Kate Schaefer
ka...@scn.org
Morgan
In article <E6wwr...@scn.org>, Kate Schaefer <ka...@scn.org> writes
>>Faggots are meatballs, quite large, and made with various cheap fillers.
>>Best served with mash and thick meaty gravy...
>
>Okay, you other Brits: is Morgan having us on, or is this true?
>
>I assumed Rob was making up humorous food-like names.
Hah! Wait till you get to stovies....
Ulrika O'Brien
no...@ibfs.demon_nospam_.co.uk ("Robert Sneddon (SEE .SIG TO RE") wrote:
> BTW what *is* aluminum?
1.) an element
2.) the correct spelling
3.) what they make beer cans out of
Why is this hard? First you Brits insert an extraneous 'i'
and then you get on us for not having it? Be careful, or
we'll come over there and laugh at how you pronounce
"Don Juan" and "Quixote" and "Nicaragua".
Rob Hansen
On 11 Mar 1997 19:06:09 -0500, p...@panix.com (P Nielsen Hayden) wrote:
>Rob Hansen (r...@fiawol.demon.co.uk) wrote:
>: On 10 Mar 1997 22:31:30 -0500, p...@panix.com (P Nielsen Hayden) wrote:
>
>: ><Psst. These Brits make this stuff up as they go along. I've spied on them
>: >and I KNOW. We take notes and try to follow along, but they just come up
>: >with new wrinkles.
>: >
>: ><Like, the same word meaning both _cigarettes_ and _meatballs_? Like sure I
>: >believe that. No, they're having us on. Same with their ridiculous street
>: >addresses. It's all a big gag. Believe me, the Welsh are the worst. They
>: >dream up this stuff during secret conferences in what they are amused to
>: >have convinced us they call the "loo."
>
>: This is true. There isn't actually a Welsh language at all it's just a
>: collection of amusing and improbably difficult to pronounce sounds
>: that we string together in absurd combinations so that we can laugh at
>: the English as they struggle to get their tongues around them. Hours
>: of fun for all the family. Or, as we call it in Wales, the
>: llynddaercynwmllgogogoch.
>
>
>Of course, the Welsh "language" is sponsored by the signmaker's guild. I
>have never seen wider, longer highway signs than those found in Wales.
>Generally speaking they're bilingual, and usually look something like this:
>
> YIELD
> -----
> YGOWERNCYWNDDAERCHLYGAULLYN
'Yield'?! No self-respecting UK road sign would be caught dead bearing
a word like 'yield'. Too medieval. Or agricultural. Incidentally,
though masterful in English, you've obviously failed to grasp the
basics of even simple Welsh. That third 'y' is self-evidently
superfluous.
Rob Hansen
On Wed, 12 Mar 1997 04:06:49 GMT, ka...@scn.org (Kate Schaefer) wrote:
>
>In a previous article, mor...@sidhen.demon.co.uk (Morgan) says:
>>
>>In article <5fuu6k$7...@news.atlantic.net>, Chuck Lipsig
>><lip...@atlantic.net> writes
>>>r...@fiawol.demon.co.uk (Rob Hansen) wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>It's probably the bar-code readers. One inadvertant zap from you at
>>>>the checkout and the person in front of you gets charged for 47 cans
>>>>of kangaroo curry and 23 cartons of faggots in gravy,
>>>
>>> OK, I'm stranded here in America, and even with an interest in BritComs,
>>>I'm missing this one. "Faggots in gravy" are ...?
>>
>>
>>Faggots are meatballs, quite large, and made with various cheap fillers.
>>Best served with mash and thick meaty gravy...
>
>Okay, you other Brits: is Morgan having us on, or is this true?
>
>I assumed Rob was making up humorous food-like names.
All true, I swear! And while I haven't actually _seen_ kangaroo curry
for sale, we do live in an area with a large South Asian population,
and our local supermarket does sell kangaroo meat, so it seems
entirely likely that someone has tried this locally.
Gary Farber
In <3326f877...@news.demon.co.uk> Rob Hansen
<r...@fiawol.demon.co.uk> wrote:
: On 11 Mar 1997 19:06:09 -0500, p...@panix.com (P Nielsen Hayden) wrote:
[. . .]
: >Of course, the Welsh "language" is sponsored by the signmaker's guild. I
: >have never seen wider, longer highway signs than those found in Wales.
: >Generally speaking they're bilingual, and usually look something like this:
: >
: > YIELD
: > -----
: > YGOWERNCYWNDDAERCHLYGAULLYN
: 'Yield'?! No self-respecting UK road sign would be caught dead bearing
: a word like 'yield'. Too medieval. Or agricultural. Incidentally,
: though masterful in English, you've obviously failed to grasp the
: basics of even simple Welsh. That third 'y' is self-evidently
: superfluous.
You'll have to forgive Patrick: he hasn't been on the roads there
recently. He meant "Give Way." This is not to be confused with the Brit
road signs whose ideograms seem to suggest "old people and children: two
points!" or "we're digging a grave" (also interpretable as "I'm pumping
hard!") or "bicyles sold here!" or "warning: dandruff!" I also liked "my
car is balanced on a see-saw," "I am driving into the ocean now,"
"Warning: drunks!" and my personal favorite: "Driver may have limp penis."
That's what I thought they indicated, anyway.
I was, however, particularly pleased to obtain at Westminster, "A Guide
for Visitors To the Galleries", Welsh Version. That is, "Arweinlyfr i
Ymwelwyr a'r Orielau." Accent marks sadly missing from my ASCII here.
This has been neges bersonol oddi wrth y Llefarydd. In rass-eff, we bod
gannddo'r hawl i ddadlau o blaid unrhyw gynnig neu yn ei erbyn, yr hawl i
holi, i drafod ac i leisio barn.
I think.
Ulrika O'Brien
r...@fiawol.demon.co.uk (Rob Hansen) wrote:
>Incidentally,
>though masterful in English, you've obviously failed to grasp the
>basics of even simple Welsh. That third 'y' is self-evidently
>superfluous.
All this discussion of Welsh reminds me that we recently
picked up a copy of _1066 and All That_, which is so killingly
funny even some 60 years after the fact that I had tears of
laugher running down my face as Hal read it aloud to me.
The reason this discussion of Welsh triggers the little
spates of tittering is because of the bit about the Saxon
(or possibly Dane) invasion which drove all the Britons
into Wales and forced everyone to become Welsh, though
the best one-liner so far has been about the Romans leaving
Britain suddenly to go participate in Gibbon's _Decline
and Fall of the Roman Empire_...
Ulrika O'Brien
r...@fiawol.demon.co.uk (Rob Hansen) wrote:
> All true, I swear! And while I haven't actually _seen_ kangaroo curry
>for sale, we do live in an area with a large South Asian population,
>and our local supermarket does sell kangaroo meat, so it seems
>entirely likely that someone has tried this locally.
Well, the friend of the wedding dress that got me to watch
_Tales of the City_ is getting married in the garden at
a place up in the canyons that specializes in weird wild
game meats, so not too long from now, *I* will have tried
kangaroo locally...
Alan Braggins
Morgan <mor...@sidhen.demon.co.uk> writes:
> ><Like, the same word meaning both _cigarettes_ and _meatballs_? Like sure I
> >believe that.
>
> meatballs.
>
> Kindling for wood fires, of course, is both.
Faggots are bundles of wood (and the root of "facism"), but I've never
heard "fag" used in that way. On the other hand, a fag is also a
younger public (i.e. private) schoolboy who runs errands etc. for an
older one. Which may or may not bring us back to American usage and
faggots.
David G. Bell
> Rob Hansen (r...@fiawol.demon.co.uk) wrote:
> : On 10 Mar 1997 22:31:30 -0500, p...@panix.com (P Nielsen Hayden) wrote:
>
> : ><Psst. These Brits make this stuff up as they go along. I've spied on them
> : >and I KNOW. We take notes and try to follow along, but they just come up
> : >with new wrinkles.
> : >
> : ><Like, the same word meaning both _cigarettes_ and _meatballs_? Like sure I
> : >believe that. No, they're having us on. Same with their ridiculous street
> : >addresses. It's all a big gag. Believe me, the Welsh are the worst. They
> : >dream up this stuff during secret conferences in what they are amused to
> : >have convinced us they call the "loo."
>
> : This is true. There isn't actually a Welsh language at all it's just a
> : collection of amusing and improbably difficult to pronounce sounds
> : that we string together in absurd combinations so that we can laugh at
> : the English as they struggle to get their tongues around them. Hours
> : of fun for all the family. Or, as we call it in Wales, the
> : llynddaercynwmllgogogoch.
>
>
> Of course, the Welsh "language" is sponsored by the signmaker's guild. I
> have never seen wider, longer highway signs than those found in Wales.
> Generally speaking they're bilingual, and usually look something like this:
>
> YIELD
> -----
> YGOWERNCYWNDDAERCHLYGAULLYN
You've gotten confused here. The Welsh can be translated into English
and abbreviated into "YMMV"
Your Motorcar May Vapourise
Steve, you saw the sign at Conway, where the traffic was jammed up for a
couple of miles, and I turned off over the Synchant Pass so as to get
the engine cooled down.
--
David G. Bell -- Farmer, SF Fan, Filker, Furry, and Punslinger..
Morgan
In article <7zohcpj...@setanta.demon.co.uk>, Alan Braggins
<ar...@setanta.demon.co.uk> writes
>Faggots are bundles of wood (and the root of "facism"), but I've never
>heard "fag" used in that way. On the other hand, a fag is also a
>younger public (i.e. private) schoolboy who runs errands etc. for an
>older one. Which may or may not bring us back to American usage and
>faggots.
Archaic use talks of 'bundles of fags'.
And I *knew* I'd forgotton a definition - thanks!
The fag of a head boy does what is know as 'fagging'....
Kathy Routliffe
Alan Braggins wrote:
>
> Morgan <mor...@sidhen.demon.co.uk> writes:
> > ><Like, the same word meaning both _cigarettes_ and _meatballs_? Like sure I
> > >believe that.
> >
>
> heard "fag" used in that way.
Actually, the first time I heard the term "fag" it was in the context of
a First World War song:
"Pack up your troubles in an old kit bag and smile, smile, smile.
While you've a lucifer to light your fag, smile, boys, that's the
style."
And, of course, a "lucifer" is a match.
Comes of having lived with a grandfather who was in the RAF during The
Great War, I suppose...
Kathy R.
Chuck Lipsig
no...@ibfs.demon_nospam_.co.uk ("Robert Sneddon (SEE .SIG TO RE") wrote:
> BTW what *is* aluminum? Aluminium Lite?
Nope -- It's just the American spelling and pronounciation. For several
years, I thought that a _Dr. Who_ reference to "Al-u-min-i-um" was some
exotic sci-fi metal, right up there with Dilithium crystals. Then it hit
me.
*OUCH!*
Chuck Lipsig lip...@atlantic.net Gainesville, FL
It's not just a .sig -- It's a .lipsig.
Doug Faunt N6TQS +1-510-655-8604
From: lip...@atlantic.net (Chuck Lipsig)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.fandom
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 1997 12:28:47 GMT
no...@ibfs.demon_nospam_.co.uk ("Robert Sneddon (SEE .SIG TO RE") wrote:
> BTW what *is* aluminum? Aluminium Lite?
Nope -- It's just the American spelling and pronounciation. For several
years, I thought that a _Dr. Who_ reference to "Al-u-min-i-um" was some
exotic sci-fi metal, right up there with Dilithium crystals. Then it hit
me.
Has anyone here have any idea how this dichotomy happened?
How did the "i" get lost?
73, doug
Chris Suslowicz
In article <E6wwr...@scn.org>,
ka...@scn.org (Kate Schaefer) wrote:
>
>Okay, you other Brits: is Morgan having us on, or is this true?
>
>I assumed Rob was making up humorous food-like names.
>
It's true, I'm afraid. One brand was "Brains Faggots" (!), and there was
also "Jumbo Meatballs" [1], a similar sort of "food". Impossible to know
what went in them [2], so assume the worst and avoid.
Chris.
[1] Hence the line in Langford's 'The Leaky Establishment': "Hard luck on
poor old Jumbo."
[2] All of the pig except the squeal?
---
To foil the bulk email spammers, there is a fnord in the return address. Remove this to reply. Remember, there are no fnords in the advertisements.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
*** This is a Microsoft(tm) free zone ***
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Allen J. Baum
In article <FAUNT.97M...@netcom15.netcom.com>,
fa...@netcom15.netcom.com (Doug Faunt N6TQS +1-510-655-8604) wrote:
>
> > BTW what *is* aluminum? Aluminium Lite?
>
> Nope -- It's just the American spelling and pronounciation. For several
> years, I thought that a _Dr. Who_ reference to "Al-u-min-i-um" was some
> exotic sci-fi metal, right up there with Dilithium crystals. Then it hit
> me.
>
> Has anyone here have any idea how this dichotomy happened?
> How did the "i" get lost?
Ahem. The way I heard it was that this exotic new material was invented
overseas (ahem) somewhere. When the first shipment was sent to the US,
it was carefully packed in a crate, and carefully misstenciled "aluminum",
whereupon the colonials at the receiving end said, "aah, *that's* what it
is"
and persisted in resisting any correction to the spelling from that time
forward.
--
***********************************************
* Allen J. Baum ab...@pa.dec.com *
* Digital Semiconductor *
* 181 Lytton Ave. *
* Palo Alto, CA 94306 *
***********************************************
Geri Sullivan
Rob Hansen wrote:
>
> All true, I swear! And while I haven't actually _seen_ kangaroo curry
> for sale, we do live in an area with a large South Asian population,
> and our local supermarket does sell kangaroo meat, so it seems
> entirely likely that someone has tried this locally.
Kangaroo curry? Hell, Kim Huett showed up last week with Kangaroo
(flavored) Condoms that he swears he bought in Picadilly or somesuch
spot in London.
He even had *3* of them, but do you think he'd let me taste just
one? No way. Then again, seeing as I've never tasted a kangaroo, how
would I know if they were authentic? Fans at the party celebrating
the 3rd printing of Terry Garey's =Joy of Winemaking= were quite
croggled by Kim's kangaroo condoms, and couldn't help wondering just
what part of the kangaroo they taste like.0
Yes. Really. You think I could make this stuff up?
Geri
--
Geri Sullivan / g...@toad-hall.com
=================
Love is no magic, no dream of fate, no passion of night.
Love is life. True life. Life true and mad. -- anon.
Geri Sullivan
Gary Farber wrote:
>
> You'll have to forgive Patrick: he hasn't been on the roads there
> recently. He meant "Give Way." This is not to be confused with the Brit
> road signs whose ideograms seem to suggest "old people and children: two
> points!" or "we're digging a grave" (also interpretable as "I'm pumping
> hard!") or "bicyles sold here!" or "warning: dandruff!" I also liked "my
> car is balanced on a see-saw," "I am driving into the ocean now,"
> "Warning: drunks!" and my personal favorite: "Driver may have limp penis."
>
> That's what I thought they indicated, anyway.
I prefered the straightforward "Zebra Crossing" text signs you see
most everywhere. But I haven't seen so much as even a postcard
showing the zebras crossing the road at the designated spot.
Geri (so I'm easily amused)
Julian Warner
Gary Farber wrote:
<whilst reminiscing about funny road-signs:>
> "Warning: drunks!"
I was amused by the amended sign in the Butchers' & Fishmongers'
Hall at the Victoria Markets in Melbourne. Originally it was a
big yellow conical thing adorned with an illustration of a person
falling over - with the legend - "warning - slippery surface" -
which of course someone had changed to "warning - drunk butcher".
julian.
Janice Gelb
In article 13039714...@terrapin.pa.dec.com, ab...@pa.dec.com (Allen J. Baum) writes:
>In article <FAUNT.97M...@netcom15.netcom.com>,
>fa...@netcom15.netcom.com (Doug Faunt N6TQS +1-510-655-8604) wrote:
>>
>> > BTW what *is* aluminum? Aluminium Lite?
>>
>> Nope -- It's just the American spelling and pronounciation. For several
>> years, I thought that a _Dr. Who_ reference to "Al-u-min-i-um" was some
>> exotic sci-fi metal, right up there with Dilithium crystals. Then it hit
>> me.
>>
>> Has anyone here have any idea how this dichotomy happened?
>> How did the "i" get lost?
>
>Ahem. The way I heard it was that this exotic new material was invented
>overseas (ahem) somewhere. When the first shipment was sent to the US,
>it was carefully packed in a crate, and carefully misstenciled "aluminum",
>whereupon the colonials at the receiving end said, "aah, *that's* what it
>is" and persisted in resisting any correction to the spelling from that
>time forward.
>
Linguistics professor John Lawler disagrees:
I can't tell you where it started, precisely, but the OED notes that
the discoverer of Al, Sir Humphry Davy, gave it the name ALUMINUM.
Later it was apparently changed (one wonders by whose authority) to
"harmonize best with other names of elements". Apparently whoever
was given charge of this responsibility failed to execute it completely,
since the original form ALUMINUM is utterly standard in the USA.
According to the OED, and as suggested, the Latin neuter plural
"alumina", used as a mass noun in English and elsewhere for AlOH, or
"the earth of alum", as "the French chemical nomenclators of 1787"
called it, is the source of the singular backformation. That would
make a singular that ended in -UM, but which one? Should it have an
[I]? Or should it be a standard consonant-stem form on Lat ALUMIN-
'alum'? Obviously, both.
For purely fortuitous reasons, one spelling convention (the one
without the [I]) became common here in the U.S. and the other did so
elsewhere. Much later, when those who had to actually *say* the
word did so, it usually came out as some variant or other of one of
the above, depending on how they interpreted the conventions of
speaking English spelling aloud. After all, they hadn't learned it
at their mothers' knee.
--------------------------------------------
John Lawler http://www.lsa.umich.edu/ling/jlawler/aue/aluminum.html
Linguistics Program University of Michigan
********************************************************************************
Janice Gelb | The only connection Sun has with this
jan...@marvin.eng.sun.com | message is the return address.
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/8018/index.html
"Old Jedi never die -- they just fade in and out"
-- Nancy Lebovitz's calligraphic button collection
********************************************************************************
Avram Grumer
>This has been neges bersonol oddi wrth y Llefarydd. In rass-eff, we bod
>gannddo'r hawl i ddadlau o blaid unrhyw gynnig neu yn ei erbyn, yr hawl i
>holi, i drafod ac i leisio barn.
So Welsh is really rot-13?
--
Avram Grumer Home: av...@interport.net
http://www.crossover.com/agrumer Work: agr...@crossover.com
The plight at the end of the carpal tunnel may be an oncoming strain.
Brenda Daverin
In article <8Xfy9TA3...@sidhen.demon.co.uk>, Morgan
<mor...@sidhen.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <7zohcpj...@setanta.demon.co.uk>, Alan Braggins
> <ar...@setanta.demon.co.uk> writes
> >Faggots are bundles of wood (and the root of "facism"), but I've never
> >heard "fag" used in that way. On the other hand, a fag is also a
> >younger public (i.e. private) schoolboy who runs errands etc. for an
> >older one. Which may or may not bring us back to American usage and
> >faggots.
>
>
> Archaic use talks of 'bundles of fags'.
>
> And I *knew* I'd forgotton a definition - thanks!
>
> The fag of a head boy does what is know as 'fagging'....
And "faggot" was an insulting term applied to women during the late
medieval and early Renaissance periods. It entered American vernacular as
an insult against gay men sometime between 1890 and 1930 (I think; I don't
have my reference books with me). Of course, this whole discussion is one
that most people in the lesbigayt* community put into their automatic
killfiles because it comes up so damn often. I still laugh over the guy
who told me that "faggot" was slang for gay men because they used men
convicted by the Church of performing homosexual acts as the kindling for
the bonfires used to burn witches.
** Remove SPAMBLOCKER from address before private reply **
Rob Hansen
On Thu, 13 Mar 1997 14:25:20 -0800, ab...@pa.dec.com (Allen J. Baum)
wrote:
>In article <FAUNT.97M...@netcom15.netcom.com>,
>fa...@netcom15.netcom.com (Doug Faunt N6TQS +1-510-655-8604) wrote:
>>
>> > BTW what *is* aluminum? Aluminium Lite?
>>
>> Nope -- It's just the American spelling and pronounciation. For several
>> years, I thought that a _Dr. Who_ reference to "Al-u-min-i-um" was some
>> exotic sci-fi metal, right up there with Dilithium crystals. Then it hit
>> me.
>>
>> Has anyone here have any idea how this dichotomy happened?
>> How did the "i" get lost?
>
>Ahem. The way I heard it was that this exotic new material was invented
>overseas (ahem) somewhere. When the first shipment was sent to the US,
>it was carefully packed in a crate, and carefully misstenciled "aluminum",
>whereupon the colonials at the receiving end said, "aah, *that's* what it
>is"
>and persisted in resisting any correction to the spelling from that time
>forward.
This sounds dubiously apocryphal. Out of curiosity, is there some
relationship between it and either the elements ending in "-um" or
those ending in "-ium" that might indicate if one spelling has more
claim to being correct than the other?
Avedon Carol
On 11 Mar 1997 19:06:09 -0500, p...@panix.com (P Nielsen Hayden) wrote:
> YIELD
> -----
> YGOWERNCYWNDDAERCHLYGAULLYN
You nearly had it if you'd left out that fannish aitch.
--
Avedon
ave...@cix.co.uk
Note: Remove ".spamout" from reply field for e-mail.
Avedon Carol
On Tue, 11 Mar 97 22:41:31 GMT, no...@ibfs.demon_nospam_.co.uk
("Robert Sneddon (SEE .SIG TO RE") wrote:
>In article <5g2jmi$i...@panix2.panix.com> p...@panix.com "P Nielsen Hayden" writes:
>
>> [Clip] Believe me, the Welsh are the worst. They
>> dream up this stuff during secret conferences in what they are amused to
>> have convinced us they call the "loo." Actually, you don't want to know
>> what they really call it. Best not to find out.>
>
> Khazi? Bog? Lavvie? I did read the concordance discussion about
>Turtledove's "The Two Georges" where "jakes" was suggested as the common
>British term for what is politely termed the "W.C." (You have wondered,
>perhaps, why we thought Mr. Fields was so funny? Now you know...) "Jakes"
>*was* used by the lower classes in the Victorian period, but has largely
>fallen out of favour with the sitting public.
>
> BTW what *is* aluminum? Aluminium Lite?
Is aluminium related to platinium and molybdenium?
Rob Hansen
On 12 Mar 1997 23:58:54 GMT, Ulrika O'Brien <uaob...@uci.edu> wrote:
>r...@fiawol.demon.co.uk (Rob Hansen) wrote:
>
>>Incidentally,
>>though masterful in English, you've obviously failed to grasp the
>>basics of even simple Welsh. That third 'y' is self-evidently
>>superfluous.
>
>All this discussion of Welsh reminds me that we recently
>picked up a copy of _1066 and All That_, which is so killingly
>funny even some 60 years after the fact that I had tears of
>laugher running down my face as Hal read it aloud to me.
>The reason this discussion of Welsh triggers the little
>spates of tittering is because of the bit about the Saxon
>(or possibly Dane) invasion which drove all the Britons
>into Wales and forced everyone to become Welsh, though
>the best one-liner so far has been about the Romans leaving
>Britain suddenly to go participate in Gibbon's _Decline
>and Fall of the Roman Empire_...
If you want a similar but more recent approach to US history, I
recommend 'Dave Barry Slept Here'. Definitely his funniest book.
Gary Farber
In <3327CE...@toad-hall.com> Geri Sullivan <g...@toad-hall.com> wrote:
[. . .]
: He even had *3* of them, but do you think he'd let me taste just
: one? No way. Then again, seeing as I've never tasted a kangaroo, how
: would I know if they were authentic? Fans at the party celebrating
: the 3rd printing of Terry Garey's =Joy of Winemaking= were quite
: croggled by Kim's kangaroo condoms, and couldn't help wondering just
: what part of the kangaroo they taste like.
The part that taste like chicken.
[. . . .]
Pete Lyon
>>Faggots are meatballs, quite large, and made with various cheap fillers.
>>Best served with mash and thick meaty gravy...
>
>
>I assumed Rob was making up humorous food-like names.
>
>Kate Schaefer
>ka...@scn.org
Nope, and fags are are also defined as a sort junior slave class in
British public schools. The fag system was/is used as a sadistic or
sexual outlet for the fustrated upper form members. cf Tom Browns School
Days.
--
Pete Lyon
B. Vermo
In article <333ccc42...@news.demon.co.uk>,Chemically, no. As an example of U.S. heterograpic spelling, probably.
But it is as common to use the form 'platina' as 'platinium' in many
languages, since it was discovered long before current naming conventions
for chemical elements.
B. Vermo
In article <3333dfe8...@news.demon.co.uk>,
r...@fiawol.demon.co.uk (Rob Hansen) wrote:
|On Thu, 13 Mar 1997 14:25:20 -0800, ab...@pa.dec.com (Allen J. Baum)
|wrote:
|
|
|relationship between it and either the elements ending in "-um" or
|those ending in "-ium" that might indicate if one spelling has more
|claim to being correct than the other?
|
Ytterbium, Silicium, Cadmium, Radium, Thorium, Uranium etc.
Aluminium was first isolated by Wöhler in 1827, so it is clearly
one of those new metals.
Ulrika O'Brien
Geri Sullivan <g...@toad-hall.com> wrote:
>Yes. Really. You think I could make this stuff up?
Of course you would, Geri. It just so happens you aren't.
I particularly liked the list of other available flavors,
including the by-now-passe curry and whiskey flavors.
Alas, there were no other marsupials listed...
Alan Braggins
b...@bigblue.no (B. Vermo) writes:
> All 'new' metals get names ending in '-ium', like Hafnium, Titanium,
> Ytterbium, Silicium, Cadmium, Radium, Thorium, Uranium etc.
> Aluminium was first isolated by Wöhler in 1827, so it is clearly
> one of those new metals.
The element with number 14 and symbol Si is silicon, not silicium, in
both English and American. The fact that French, German, Dutch,
Swedish and Norwegian are more consistent about this should not be
allowed to interfere with an Anglo-American argument.
(Languages based on the fact that .fr, .can, .de, .nl, and .se show up
on the first couple of pages of an AltaVista search for Silicium, and
your .no address, so I could be wrong about some of them).
B. Vermo
In article <7zzpw1q...@setanta.demon.co.uk>,
Alan Braggins <ar...@setanta.demon.co.uk> wrote:
|(Languages based on the fact that .fr, .can, .de, .nl, and .se show up
|on the first couple of pages of an AltaVista search for Silicium, and
|your .no address, so I could be wrong about some of them).
|
The possible exception is that in Sweden it seems common to use
the name of the mineral interchangeably with the name of the element.
Everywhere you will find silicon as a liquid or greasy substance,
together with silene and silan.
As far as I know, it is only in English the name of the element
follows the naming standard for ketones. This causes lot of translation
trouble when news media spout stories of rubber transistors. But I do
believe you use ferrosilicium in your steel works both in UK and US?
At least, I have never heard any journalist tell about rubbery steel.
Bernard Peek
In article <NY7LzgRD...@bigblue.no>, "B. Vermo" <b...@bigblue.no>
writes
>In article <7zzpw1q...@setanta.demon.co.uk>,
>Alan Braggins <ar...@setanta.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>|(Languages based on the fact that .fr, .can, .de, .nl, and .se show up
>|on the first couple of pages of an AltaVista search for Silicium, and
>|your .no address, so I could be wrong about some of them).
>|
>No, as far as I can see most countries have got the naming right.
>The possible exception is that in Sweden it seems common to use
>the name of the mineral interchangeably with the name of the element.
>Everywhere you will find silicon as a liquid or greasy substance,
>together with silene and silan.
Silene is a tradename here. Chemical nomenclature is actually under
international control through IUPAC (International Union for Pure and
Applied Chemistry), or at least it was when I was a chemist.
--
Bernard Peek
b...@intersec.demon.co.uk