info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Shirttail cousins -- blogging's bertter
109 views
Skip to first unread message
Steve Hayes
Dec 26, 2015, 12:08:00 AM12/26/15
to
About 40 years ago an American relative used a term, "shirt-tail
cousin", that was unfamiliar to me. I did not know her well, and was
too shy to ask what she meant by it in case she took offence. Last
year I asked about it on an English usage forum, and mentioned that
she came from El Paso, Illinois, and later lived in New Orleans, to
give a clue to her dialect area, in case anyone knew about such
things. This request was treated with a great deal of rudeness by a
supercilious American, who accused me of inventing a place with a
Spanish name in Illinois, but had no reliable information on the
meaning of the term.
So yesterday I blogged about it. Since it was Christmas day, it also
seemed a suitable opportunity to post a picture of the cousin I
referred to, taken on Christmas day in 1981, and the blog post is
here.
https://t.co/pwAnayyTnF
And this brought the answer to my question. The English usage forum
just produced a great deal of acrimonious discussion with no useful
information. The blog post prompted a cousin to find the answer to my
question here:
http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-shi5.htm
Shirttail relative
"Q From Charles F Weishar: I attempted to find the source of shirttail
relative and similar expressions in Hendrickson’s encyclopedia and
your site but have found nothing. I hear the phrase used to describe a
person who is close but not actually related by blood.
A That’s roughly the meaning given in the dictionaries. It’s usually
said to refer to somebody who is a relative by marriage or is only
distantly related, such as a fourth cousin, or is a family friend with
honorary status as a relative. It’s fairly common in the USA and has
been since the 1950s or thereabouts.
Getting to the bottom of it, so to speak, may be a task beyond my
abilities from this side of the Atlantic Ocean. One dictionary of
American slang suggests it was originally southern and mid-western US
dialect. The Dictionary of American Regional English (DARE) has
examples from 1927 onwards, such as shirt-tail kin and shirt tail
cousin, as well as your form."
I have a Facebook friend whom I describe as my "step fourth
cousin-in-law once removed" (her stepfather was my wife's fourth
cousin once removed). I think I can now refer to her as a "shirttail
cousin" for short.
Maybe my mistake was Googling for "shirt-tail cousin" with a hyphen
instead of "shirttail relative", but at any rate, the blog post
produced the information I was looking for, whereas a query in the
appropriate newsgroup didn't, so I conclude that blogging's better.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
cousin", that was unfamiliar to me. I did not know her well, and was
too shy to ask what she meant by it in case she took offence. Last
year I asked about it on an English usage forum, and mentioned that
she came from El Paso, Illinois, and later lived in New Orleans, to
give a clue to her dialect area, in case anyone knew about such
things. This request was treated with a great deal of rudeness by a
supercilious American, who accused me of inventing a place with a
Spanish name in Illinois, but had no reliable information on the
meaning of the term.
So yesterday I blogged about it. Since it was Christmas day, it also
seemed a suitable opportunity to post a picture of the cousin I
referred to, taken on Christmas day in 1981, and the blog post is
here.
https://t.co/pwAnayyTnF
And this brought the answer to my question. The English usage forum
just produced a great deal of acrimonious discussion with no useful
information. The blog post prompted a cousin to find the answer to my
question here:
http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-shi5.htm
Shirttail relative
"Q From Charles F Weishar: I attempted to find the source of shirttail
relative and similar expressions in Hendrickson’s encyclopedia and
your site but have found nothing. I hear the phrase used to describe a
person who is close but not actually related by blood.
A That’s roughly the meaning given in the dictionaries. It’s usually
said to refer to somebody who is a relative by marriage or is only
distantly related, such as a fourth cousin, or is a family friend with
honorary status as a relative. It’s fairly common in the USA and has
been since the 1950s or thereabouts.
Getting to the bottom of it, so to speak, may be a task beyond my
abilities from this side of the Atlantic Ocean. One dictionary of
American slang suggests it was originally southern and mid-western US
dialect. The Dictionary of American Regional English (DARE) has
examples from 1927 onwards, such as shirt-tail kin and shirt tail
cousin, as well as your form."
I have a Facebook friend whom I describe as my "step fourth
cousin-in-law once removed" (her stepfather was my wife's fourth
cousin once removed). I think I can now refer to her as a "shirttail
cousin" for short.
Maybe my mistake was Googling for "shirt-tail cousin" with a hyphen
instead of "shirttail relative", but at any rate, the blog post
produced the information I was looking for, whereas a query in the
appropriate newsgroup didn't, so I conclude that blogging's better.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
Snidely
Dec 26, 2015, 1:36:17 AM12/26/15
to
On Friday or thereabouts, Steve Hayes asked ...
I remember the mythicalism of location being discussed with some heat,
but evidently I didn't catch the original question. I'd have been
happy to give my usage (which overlaps what you reported today), but I
certainly would not have been able to give much documentation on its
proper usage or range of appearance.
So blogging is better. May the joy of Christmas extend past the 25th
of December.
/dps
--
"That's a good sort of hectic, innit?"
" Very much so, and I'd recommend the haggis wontons."
-njm
but evidently I didn't catch the original question. I'd have been
happy to give my usage (which overlaps what you reported today), but I
certainly would not have been able to give much documentation on its
proper usage or range of appearance.
So blogging is better. May the joy of Christmas extend past the 25th
of December.
/dps
--
"That's a good sort of hectic, innit?"
" Very much so, and I'd recommend the haggis wontons."
-njm
Steve Hayes
Dec 26, 2015, 4:53:27 AM12/26/15
to
On Fri, 25 Dec 2015 22:36:10 -0800, Snidely <snide...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>> Shirttail relative
>>
>> "Q From Charles F Weishar: I attempted to find the source of shirttail
>> relative and similar expressions in Hendrickson’s encyclopedia and
>> your site but have found nothing. I hear the phrase used to describe a
>> person who is close but not actually related by blood.
>>
>> A That’s roughly the meaning given in the dictionaries. It’s usually
>> said to refer to somebody who is a relative by marriage or is only
>> distantly related, such as a fourth cousin, or is a family friend with
>> honorary status as a relative. It’s fairly common in the USA and has
>> been since the 1950s or thereabouts.
>>
>> Getting to the bottom of it, so to speak, may be a task beyond my
>> abilities from this side of the Atlantic Ocean. One dictionary of
>> American slang suggests it was originally southern and mid-western US
>> dialect. The Dictionary of American Regional English (DARE) has
>> examples from 1927 onwards, such as shirt-tail kin and shirt tail
>> cousin, as well as your form."
given in the quoted source seems to me to fit with the El Paso--New
Orleans axis -- interesting that none of the self-proclaimed AmE
experts on aue were able to detect it, but chose to spread
disinformation instead, which just goes to show how the signal/noise
ratio on aue has deteriorated over the years.
In the light of that, I'd be interested in knowing how close to that
axis you live or grew up, if the usage is familiar to you. It's a pity
you missed the original question in the midst of all the noise, since
you might have been able to answer it 15 months ago.
>So blogging is better. May the joy of Christmas extend past the 25th
>of December.
Thank you, and for you too.
wrote:
>> Shirttail relative
>>
>> "Q From Charles F Weishar: I attempted to find the source of shirttail
>> relative and similar expressions in Hendrickson’s encyclopedia and
>> your site but have found nothing. I hear the phrase used to describe a
>> person who is close but not actually related by blood.
>>
>> A That’s roughly the meaning given in the dictionaries. It’s usually
>> said to refer to somebody who is a relative by marriage or is only
>> distantly related, such as a fourth cousin, or is a family friend with
>> honorary status as a relative. It’s fairly common in the USA and has
>> been since the 1950s or thereabouts.
>>
>> Getting to the bottom of it, so to speak, may be a task beyond my
>> abilities from this side of the Atlantic Ocean. One dictionary of
>> American slang suggests it was originally southern and mid-western US
>> dialect. The Dictionary of American Regional English (DARE) has
>> examples from 1927 onwards, such as shirt-tail kin and shirt tail
>> cousin, as well as your form."
>I remember the mythicalism of location being discussed with some heat,
>but evidently I didn't catch the original question. I'd have been
>happy to give my usage (which overlaps what you reported today), but I
>certainly would not have been able to give much documentation on its
>proper usage or range of appearance.
The description of "southern and mid-western US regional dialect"
>but evidently I didn't catch the original question. I'd have been
>happy to give my usage (which overlaps what you reported today), but I
>certainly would not have been able to give much documentation on its
>proper usage or range of appearance.
given in the quoted source seems to me to fit with the El Paso--New
Orleans axis -- interesting that none of the self-proclaimed AmE
experts on aue were able to detect it, but chose to spread
disinformation instead, which just goes to show how the signal/noise
ratio on aue has deteriorated over the years.
In the light of that, I'd be interested in knowing how close to that
axis you live or grew up, if the usage is familiar to you. It's a pity
you missed the original question in the midst of all the noise, since
you might have been able to answer it 15 months ago.
>So blogging is better. May the joy of Christmas extend past the 25th
>of December.
Lewis
Dec 26, 2015, 7:08:47 AM12/26/15
to
In message <7n6s7bd728s05sdgr...@4ax.com>
As I recall, the question was answered in the original thread.
--
I never wanted to do this in the first place.
As I recall, the question was answered in the original thread.
--
I never wanted to do this in the first place.
Peter T. Daniels
Dec 26, 2015, 8:30:00 AM12/26/15
to
On Saturday, December 26, 2015 at 12:08:00 AM UTC-5, Steve Hayes wrote:
> About 40 years ago an American relative used a term, "shirt-tail
> cousin", that was unfamiliar to me. I did not know her well, and was
> too shy to ask what she meant by it in case she took offence. Last
> year I asked about it on an English usage forum, and mentioned that
> she came from El Paso, Illinois, and later lived in New Orleans, to
> give a clue to her dialect area,
So you still don't understand why knowing where the tiny village is is relevant
> About 40 years ago an American relative used a term, "shirt-tail
> cousin", that was unfamiliar to me. I did not know her well, and was
> too shy to ask what she meant by it in case she took offence. Last
> year I asked about it on an English usage forum, and mentioned that
> she came from El Paso, Illinois, and later lived in New Orleans, to
> give a clue to her dialect area,
to the original question.
Illinois is _still_ a rather large place, taking part in at least three and
possibly five recognizable dialect areas: Chicago, St. Louis, Louisville,
"General Midwest," and perhaps Memphis.
And Lewis is correct, the "shirt-tail cousin" question was discussed at
length, but not with reference to El Paso, Illinois, which does _not_
comprise a dialect area of its own.
Athel Cornish-Bowden
Dec 26, 2015, 9:21:28 AM12/26/15
to
On 2015-12-26 09:53:01 +0000, Steve Hayes said:
> [ ••• ]
> -- interesting that none of the self-proclaimed AmE
> experts on aue were able to detect it, but chose to spread
> disinformation instead, which just goes to show how the signal/noise
> ratio on aue has deteriorated over the years.
I think you're generalizing too much from the nastiness of one American
poster, which was entirely in character.
--
athel
> [ ••• ]
>
> The description of "southern and mid-western US regional dialect"
> given in the quoted source seems to me to fit with the El Paso--New
> Orleans axis
Or maybe the El Paso-El Paso axis?
> The description of "southern and mid-western US regional dialect"
> given in the quoted source seems to me to fit with the El Paso--New
> Orleans axis
> -- interesting that none of the self-proclaimed AmE
> experts on aue were able to detect it, but chose to spread
> disinformation instead, which just goes to show how the signal/noise
> ratio on aue has deteriorated over the years.
poster, which was entirely in character.
--
athel
Tony Cooper
Dec 26, 2015, 9:41:22 AM12/26/15
to
expend the same amount of time and effort by asking Google where El
Paso, Illinois is located.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Peter T. Daniels
Dec 26, 2015, 9:49:18 AM12/26/15
to
On Saturday, December 26, 2015 at 9:21:28 AM UTC-5, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> On 2015-12-26 09:53:01 +0000, Steve Hayes said:
>
> > [ *** ]
> On 2015-12-26 09:53:01 +0000, Steve Hayes said:
>
> >
> > The description of "southern and mid-western US regional dialect"
> > given in the quoted source seems to me to fit with the El Paso--New
> > Orleans axis
>
> Or maybe the El Paso-El Paso axis?
>
> > -- interesting that none of the self-proclaimed AmE
> > experts on aue were able to detect it, but chose to spread
> > disinformation instead, which just goes to show how the signal/noise
> > ratio on aue has deteriorated over the years.
>
> I think you're generalizing too much from the nastiness of one American
> poster, which was entirely in character.
Which pales before the nastiness of one expat Brit whose presense in France
> > The description of "southern and mid-western US regional dialect"
> > given in the quoted source seems to me to fit with the El Paso--New
> > Orleans axis
>
> Or maybe the El Paso-El Paso axis?
>
> > -- interesting that none of the self-proclaimed AmE
> > experts on aue were able to detect it, but chose to spread
> > disinformation instead, which just goes to show how the signal/noise
> > ratio on aue has deteriorated over the years.
>
> I think you're generalizing too much from the nastiness of one American
> poster, which was entirely in character.
is a matter of concern.
Lewis
Dec 26, 2015, 9:56:18 AM12/26/15
to
In message <bl9t7bl068amr1m1b...@4ax.com>
That would imply Numpty hadn't started off with "there is no such
place", IIRC.
That was back when I was still figuring out how to kill the entire
thread under Numpty's posts (which some posters here, by stripping
references, have subverted), and I certainly recall quoted text of his
claiming El Paso Illinois did not and could not exist.
--
You are responsible for your Rose
place", IIRC.
That was back when I was still figuring out how to kill the entire
thread under Numpty's posts (which some posters here, by stripping
references, have subverted), and I certainly recall quoted text of his
claiming El Paso Illinois did not and could not exist.
--
You are responsible for your Rose
Doug Chadduck
Dec 26, 2015, 11:03:46 AM12/26/15
to
relative" are commonly used terms. At least they were in my family. I'D
always wondered about "shirttail", versus back pocket or belt or
whatever, but supposed it came from "grab my shirttail and follow me" or
some other similar usage for a shirttail". Or as one of your blog replys
"tag-a-long". Don't remember specifically anyone who was referred to as
"shirttail" so not sure how close an association there was.
Joe Roberts
Dec 26, 2015, 12:02:42 PM12/26/15
to
Raised in southwestern Texas, I recall hearing two usages for the term
"shirt-tail" (there might have been more).
The first usage simply referred to distant relatives whom folks didn't
bother to label in the genealogical sense. For example, no one referred to
their third or fourth cousins, whether 'removed' or not, by that term. They
were simply 'shirt-tail' cousins. There was nothing derogatory in it; it
was light-hearted and for convenience in any conversation.
The second referred to a male child who looked similar to his father or who
went into same profession, as in: "he grew up on his daddy's shirttails'.
It was similar to saying "he followed in his father's footsteps".
Also I'd like to apologize for the rudeness of that supercilious American.
It was uncalled for. Hopefully he's not a shirt-tail cousin of mine.
Cheers,
Joe
"shirt-tail" (there might have been more).
The first usage simply referred to distant relatives whom folks didn't
bother to label in the genealogical sense. For example, no one referred to
their third or fourth cousins, whether 'removed' or not, by that term. They
were simply 'shirt-tail' cousins. There was nothing derogatory in it; it
was light-hearted and for convenience in any conversation.
The second referred to a male child who looked similar to his father or who
went into same profession, as in: "he grew up on his daddy's shirttails'.
It was similar to saying "he followed in his father's footsteps".
Also I'd like to apologize for the rudeness of that supercilious American.
It was uncalled for. Hopefully he's not a shirt-tail cousin of mine.
Cheers,
Joe
Steve Hayes
Dec 26, 2015, 12:28:25 PM12/26/15
to
On Sat, 26 Dec 2015 12:02:43 -0500, "Joe Roberts"
<shoreh...@att.net> wrote:
>Raised in southwestern Texas, I recall hearing two usages for the term
>"shirt-tail" (there might have been more).
>
>The first usage simply referred to distant relatives whom folks didn't
>bother to label in the genealogical sense. For example, no one referred to
>their third or fourth cousins, whether 'removed' or not, by that term. They
>were simply 'shirt-tail' cousins. There was nothing derogatory in it; it
>was light-hearted and for convenience in any conversation.
Thanks very much for the comments. It seems then that the usage is
<shoreh...@att.net> wrote:
>Raised in southwestern Texas, I recall hearing two usages for the term
>"shirt-tail" (there might have been more).
>
>The first usage simply referred to distant relatives whom folks didn't
>bother to label in the genealogical sense. For example, no one referred to
>their third or fourth cousins, whether 'removed' or not, by that term. They
>were simply 'shirt-tail' cousins. There was nothing derogatory in it; it
>was light-hearted and for convenience in any conversation.
fairly consistent, and is a convenient way of referring to someone
whom you know is related, but don't know exactly how.
>The second referred to a male child who looked similar to his father or who
>went into same profession, as in: "he grew up on his daddy's shirttails'.
>It was similar to saying "he followed in his father's footsteps".
--
Steve Hayes
Web: http://hayesgreene.wordpress.com/
http://hayesgreene.blogspot.com
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/afgen/
Steve Hayes
Dec 26, 2015, 1:05:59 PM12/26/15
to
On Sat, 26 Dec 2015 12:06:08 -0000 (UTC), Lewis
<g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>In message <7n6s7bd728s05sdgr...@4ax.com>
> Steve Hayes <haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>> And this brought the answer to my question.
>
>As I recall, the question was answered in the original thread.
I suppose it is possible, but if so, I don't recall it with any
<g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>In message <7n6s7bd728s05sdgr...@4ax.com>
> Steve Hayes <haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>> And this brought the answer to my question.
>
>As I recall, the question was answered in the original thread.
clarity; probably because it was obscured by the smokeskreen of
disinformation.
Steve Hayes
Dec 26, 2015, 1:09:28 PM12/26/15
to
On Sat, 26 Dec 2015 08:03:53 -0800, Doug Chadduck
<dcha...@comcast.net> wrote:
>On 12/25/2015 9:07 PM, Steve Hayes wrote:
>> http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-shi5.htm
>>
>> Shirttail relative
>>
>> "Q From Charles F Weishar: I attempted to find the source of shirttail
>> relative and similar expressions in Hendrickson’s encyclopedia and
>> your site but have found nothing. I hear the phrase used to describe a
>> person who is close but not actually related by blood.
>>
>> A That’s roughly the meaning given in the dictionaries. It’s usually
>> said to refer to somebody who is a relative by marriage or is only
>> distantly related, such as a fourth cousin, or is a family friend with
>> honorary status as a relative. It’s fairly common in the USA and has
>> been since the 1950s or thereabouts.
<dcha...@comcast.net> wrote:
>On 12/25/2015 9:07 PM, Steve Hayes wrote:
>> http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-shi5.htm
>>
>> Shirttail relative
>>
>> "Q From Charles F Weishar: I attempted to find the source of shirttail
>> relative and similar expressions in Hendrickson’s encyclopedia and
>> your site but have found nothing. I hear the phrase used to describe a
>> person who is close but not actually related by blood.
>>
>> A That’s roughly the meaning given in the dictionaries. It’s usually
>> said to refer to somebody who is a relative by marriage or is only
>> distantly related, such as a fourth cousin, or is a family friend with
>> honorary status as a relative. It’s fairly common in the USA and has
>> been since the 1950s or thereabouts.
>I'm originally from North Dakota and "shirttail cousin" or "shirttail
>relative" are commonly used terms. At least they were in my family. I'D
>always wondered about "shirttail", versus back pocket or belt or
>whatever, but supposed it came from "grab my shirttail and follow me" or
>some other similar usage for a shirttail". Or as one of your blog replys
>"tag-a-long". Don't remember specifically anyone who was referred to as
>"shirttail" so not sure how close an association there was.
Thanks; your understanding also seems consistent with that definition,
>relative" are commonly used terms. At least they were in my family. I'D
>always wondered about "shirttail", versus back pocket or belt or
>whatever, but supposed it came from "grab my shirttail and follow me" or
>some other similar usage for a shirttail". Or as one of your blog replys
>"tag-a-long". Don't remember specifically anyone who was referred to as
>"shirttail" so not sure how close an association there was.
so it's definitely a lot clearer now.
Snidely
Dec 26, 2015, 2:16:11 PM12/26/15
to
Lewis blurted out:
Ah, but what do your shirttail relatives say about it?
/dps
--
But happiness cannot be pursued; it must ensue. One must have a reason
to 'be happy.'"
Viktor Frankl
/dps
--
But happiness cannot be pursued; it must ensue. One must have a reason
to 'be happy.'"
Viktor Frankl
Snidely
Dec 26, 2015, 2:38:51 PM12/26/15
to
Saturday, Steve Hayes quipped:
> On Fri, 25 Dec 2015 before midnite, Snidely <snide...@gmail.com>
(grouplist trimmed)
> The description of "southern and mid-western US regional dialect"
> given in the quoted source seems to me to fit with the El Paso--New
> Orleans axis -- [...]
Oregon as a youngster. As a young adult, he eventually made his way to
NYC, where my mother was raised (German Lutheran Brooklyner). I was
born back on the West Coast.
And in fact, my first encounter with "shirttail relative" wasn't
through lots of people using it around me. It was from a passing
comment on the radio was introducing a recording of a piece by William
Bolcom, and admitted to being a shirttail relative of Bolcom's. That
puzzled me, but I asked someone (possibly one my my parental units) and
got an explanation. That explanation has been adequate for
understanding the term on few additional encounters, and I never looked
for a formal definition.
(Bolcom was born in Seattle, west of the "axis", but I don't know where
the announcer was born; the announcer was working in Portland OR back
when there was a commercial station carrying classical music (in the
evenings only, IIRC). So a long time ago.)
/dps
--
"What do you think of my cart, Miss Morland? A neat one, is not it?
Well hung: curricle-hung in fact. Come sit by me and we'll test the
springs."
(Speculative fiction by H.Lacedaemonian.)
> On Fri, 25 Dec 2015 before midnite, Snidely <snide...@gmail.com>
(grouplist trimmed)
> The description of "southern and mid-western US regional dialect"
> given in the quoted source seems to me to fit with the El Paso--New
> In the light of that, I'd be interested in knowing how close to that
> axis you live or grew up, if the usage is familiar to you. It's a pity
> you missed the original question in the midst of all the noise, since
> you might have been able to answer it 15 months ago.
>
>
Not very close at all. My dad started in Toledo, Ohio, but moved to
> axis you live or grew up, if the usage is familiar to you. It's a pity
> you missed the original question in the midst of all the noise, since
> you might have been able to answer it 15 months ago.
>
>
Oregon as a youngster. As a young adult, he eventually made his way to
NYC, where my mother was raised (German Lutheran Brooklyner). I was
born back on the West Coast.
And in fact, my first encounter with "shirttail relative" wasn't
through lots of people using it around me. It was from a passing
comment on the radio was introducing a recording of a piece by William
Bolcom, and admitted to being a shirttail relative of Bolcom's. That
puzzled me, but I asked someone (possibly one my my parental units) and
got an explanation. That explanation has been adequate for
understanding the term on few additional encounters, and I never looked
for a formal definition.
(Bolcom was born in Seattle, west of the "axis", but I don't know where
the announcer was born; the announcer was working in Portland OR back
when there was a commercial station carrying classical music (in the
evenings only, IIRC). So a long time ago.)
/dps
--
"What do you think of my cart, Miss Morland? A neat one, is not it?
Well hung: curricle-hung in fact. Come sit by me and we'll test the
springs."
(Speculative fiction by H.Lacedaemonian.)
Snidely
Dec 26, 2015, 2:40:18 PM12/26/15
to
Snidely explained :
> introducing a recording of a piece by William Bolcom, and admitted to being a
> shirttail relative of Bolcom's. That puzzled me, but I asked someone
> (possibly one my my parental units) and got an explanation. That explanation
> has been adequate for understanding the term on few additional encounters,
> and I never looked for a formal definition.
>
> (Bolcom was born in Seattle, west of the "axis", but I don't know where the
> announcer was born; the announcer was working in Portland OR back when there
> was a commercial station carrying classical music (in the evenings only,
> IIRC). So a long time ago.)
>
> /dps
--
Maybe C282Y is simply one of the hangers-on, a groupie following a
future guitar god of the human genome: an allele with undiscovered
virtuosity, currently soloing in obscurity in Mom's garage.
Bradley Wertheim, theAtlantic.com, Jan 10 2013
> Saturday, Steve Hayes quipped:
>> On Fri, 25 Dec 2015 before midnite, Snidely <snide...@gmail.com>
>
> (grouplist trimmed)
>
>> The description of "southern and mid-western US regional dialect"
>> given in the quoted source seems to me to fit with the El Paso--New
>> Orleans axis -- [...]
>> In the light of that, I'd be interested in knowing how close to that
>> axis you live or grew up, if the usage is familiar to you. It's a pity
>> you missed the original question in the midst of all the noise, since
>> you might have been able to answer it 15 months ago.
>>
>>
> Not very close at all. My dad started in Toledo, Ohio, but moved to Oregon
> as a youngster. As a young adult, he eventually made his way to NYC, where
> my mother was raised (German Lutheran Brooklyner). I was born back on the
> West Coast.
>
> And in fact, my first encounter with "shirttail relative" wasn't through lots
> of people using it around me. It was from a passing comment on the radio was
>
an announcer was
>> On Fri, 25 Dec 2015 before midnite, Snidely <snide...@gmail.com>
>
> (grouplist trimmed)
>
>> The description of "southern and mid-western US regional dialect"
>> given in the quoted source seems to me to fit with the El Paso--New
>> Orleans axis -- [...]
>> In the light of that, I'd be interested in knowing how close to that
>> axis you live or grew up, if the usage is familiar to you. It's a pity
>> you missed the original question in the midst of all the noise, since
>> you might have been able to answer it 15 months ago.
>>
>>
> Not very close at all. My dad started in Toledo, Ohio, but moved to Oregon
> as a youngster. As a young adult, he eventually made his way to NYC, where
> my mother was raised (German Lutheran Brooklyner). I was born back on the
> West Coast.
>
> And in fact, my first encounter with "shirttail relative" wasn't through lots
> of people using it around me. It was from a passing comment on the radio was
>
> introducing a recording of a piece by William Bolcom, and admitted to being a
> shirttail relative of Bolcom's. That puzzled me, but I asked someone
> (possibly one my my parental units) and got an explanation. That explanation
> has been adequate for understanding the term on few additional encounters,
> and I never looked for a formal definition.
>
> (Bolcom was born in Seattle, west of the "axis", but I don't know where the
> announcer was born; the announcer was working in Portland OR back when there
> was a commercial station carrying classical music (in the evenings only,
> IIRC). So a long time ago.)
>
> /dps
--
future guitar god of the human genome: an allele with undiscovered
virtuosity, currently soloing in obscurity in Mom's garage.
Bradley Wertheim, theAtlantic.com, Jan 10 2013
Peter T. Daniels
Dec 26, 2015, 3:07:15 PM12/26/15
to
On Saturday, December 26, 2015 at 9:56:18 AM UTC-5, Lewis wrote:
> That was back when I was still figuring out how to kill the entire
> thread under Numpty's posts (which some posters here, by stripping
> references, have subverted), and I certainly recall quoted text of his
> claiming El Paso Illinois did not and could not exist.
Lewie's memory is as screwy as the rest of him.
> That was back when I was still figuring out how to kill the entire
> thread under Numpty's posts (which some posters here, by stripping
> references, have subverted), and I certainly recall quoted text of his
> claiming El Paso Illinois did not and could not exist.
Why "could" it "not exist"?
Peter T. Daniels
Dec 26, 2015, 3:09:25 PM12/26/15
to
David Kleinecke
Dec 26, 2015, 3:24:11 PM12/26/15
to
of midwest relatives - some several cousins off - and I don't remember
ever hearing about "shirttails" or the like.
Lewis
Dec 26, 2015, 3:41:33 PM12/26/15
to
In message <mn.d2a47dfc492716ed.127094@snitoo>
Done of them are on USENET.
--
There used to be such simple directions, back in the days before they
invented parallel universes - Up and Down, Right and Left, Backward and
Forward, Past and Future... But normal directions don't work in the
multiverse, which has far too many dimensions for anyone to find their
way. So new ones have to be invented so that the way can be found. Like:
East of the Sun, West of the Moon Or: Behind the North Wind. Or: At the
Back of Beyond. Or: There and Back Again. Or: Beyond the Fields We
Know. --Lords and Ladies
--
There used to be such simple directions, back in the days before they
invented parallel universes - Up and Down, Right and Left, Backward and
Forward, Past and Future... But normal directions don't work in the
multiverse, which has far too many dimensions for anyone to find their
way. So new ones have to be invented so that the way can be found. Like:
East of the Sun, West of the Moon Or: Behind the North Wind. Or: At the
Back of Beyond. Or: There and Back Again. Or: Beyond the Fields We
Know. --Lords and Ladies
John Dawkins
Dec 26, 2015, 3:45:36 PM12/26/15
to
In article <47os7b9gp645lh3t4...@4ax.com>,
I grew up about 60 miles to the east of that axis, in a town once known
as "The Home of Chuckles" (a sort of jellied candy, not a clown).
Although I had plenty of cousins, of the shirt-tail variety and
otherwise, I don't recall the term as being in common use.
--
J.
as "The Home of Chuckles" (a sort of jellied candy, not a clown).
Although I had plenty of cousins, of the shirt-tail variety and
otherwise, I don't recall the term as being in common use.
--
J.
![Peter Duncanson [BrE]'s profile photo](http://lh3.googleusercontent.com/a-/ALV-UjU1GGYFBCZgBCNB-pRgkosMu-ej0qpnECw3jc8uGYOTiF8a=s40-c)
Peter Duncanson [BrE]
Dec 26, 2015, 4:22:06 PM12/26/15
to
On Sat, 26 Dec 2015 12:06:08 -0000 (UTC), Lewis
<g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
<g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>In message <7n6s7bd728s05sdgr...@4ax.com>
> Steve Hayes <haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>> And this brought the answer to my question.
>
>As I recall, the question was answered in the original thread.
I recall responsing to the matter of the existence of El Paso, Illinois,
> Steve Hayes <haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>> And this brought the answer to my question.
>
>As I recall, the question was answered in the original thread.
but I don't recall any discussion of "shirt-tail cousin".
The OED has in the entry for "shirt, n.":
shirt-tail n.
(a) the tail of a shirt;
(b) U.S. used attrib. or as adj. to designate something small and
insignificant, or a remote relationship; freq. as shirt-tail boy n.
a very young boy.
1845 J. J. Hooper Some Adventures Simon Suggs 13 From the time
he was a ‘shirt-tail boy’, [his wits] were always too sharp for
his father's.
1846 W. D. Stewart & J. W. Webb Altowan I. vi. 174 He..leaped
into the river,..and made a shirt-tail across the prairie on the
other side.
1873 C. G. Leland Egyptian Sketch-bk. 47 Rushing madly about,
their blue-and-white shirt-tails waving in the wind.
1878 J. C. Guild Old Times in Tennessee 411, I traversed these
granite hills and beautiful vales as a shirt-tail boy.
1929 W. Faulkner Sound & Fury 256 My people owned slaves here
when you all were running little shirt tail country stores.
1938 M. K. Rawlings Yearling xxxiii. 421 Nobody but your
folks'll bother with a little ol' shirt-tail boy like you.
1941 Amer. Speech 16 24/2 Shirt-tail kin, a remote relationship.
1975 Publishers Weekly 8 Sept. 57/2 A shirttail relation of the
hotel-owning branch of the family.
{This entry has not yet been fully updated (first published 1914).}
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
Joe Roberts
Dec 26, 2015, 5:10:12 PM12/26/15
to
"Snidely" wrote:
> (grouplist trimmed ... snip for brevity, please see the original post)
>
> --
> "What do you think of my cart, Miss Morland? A neat one, is not it? Well
> hung: curricle-hung in fact. Come sit by me and we'll test the springs."
> (Speculative fiction by H.Lacedaemonian.)
Hmmm ...
> --
> "What do you think of my cart, Miss Morland? A neat one, is not it? Well
> hung: curricle-hung in fact. Come sit by me and we'll test the springs."
> (Speculative fiction by H.Lacedaemonian.)
Kissin' cousins, perhaps?
Looking back at our family's lines, I'm sure we had plenty of those.
Cheers,
Joe
Lewis
Dec 26, 2015, 5:40:08 PM12/26/15
to
In message <n5n336$1gp$1...@dont-email.me>
not mean "cousin you are especially close to" but rather, "cousins it's
OK to have sex with."
--
A bartender is just a pharmacist with a limited inventory.
Joe Roberts <shoreh...@att.net> wrote:
> "Snidely" wrote:
>> (grouplist trimmed ... snip for brevity, please see the original post)
>>
>> --
>> "What do you think of my cart, Miss Morland? A neat one, is not it? Well
>> hung: curricle-hung in fact. Come sit by me and we'll test the springs."
>> (Speculative fiction by H.Lacedaemonian.)
> Hmmm ...
> Kissin' cousins, perhaps?
Maybe, but most people seem to not know what that phrase means. It does
> "Snidely" wrote:
>> (grouplist trimmed ... snip for brevity, please see the original post)
>>
>> --
>> "What do you think of my cart, Miss Morland? A neat one, is not it? Well
>> hung: curricle-hung in fact. Come sit by me and we'll test the springs."
>> (Speculative fiction by H.Lacedaemonian.)
> Hmmm ...
> Kissin' cousins, perhaps?
not mean "cousin you are especially close to" but rather, "cousins it's
OK to have sex with."
--
A bartender is just a pharmacist with a limited inventory.
Steve Hayes
Dec 26, 2015, 7:38:45 PM12/26/15
to
On Sat, 26 Dec 2015 11:38:45 -0800, Snidely <snide...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>Saturday, Steve Hayes quipped:
>> On Fri, 25 Dec 2015 before midnite, Snidely <snide...@gmail.com>
>
>(grouplist trimmed)
>
>> The description of "southern and mid-western US regional dialect"
>> given in the quoted source seems to me to fit with the El Paso--New
>> Orleans axis -- [...]
>> In the light of that, I'd be interested in knowing how close to that
>> axis you live or grew up, if the usage is familiar to you. It's a pity
>> you missed the original question in the midst of all the noise, since
>> you might have been able to answer it 15 months ago.
>>
>>
>Not very close at all. My dad started in Toledo, Ohio, but moved to
>Oregon as a youngster. As a young adult, he eventually made his way to
>NYC, where my mother was raised (German Lutheran Brooklyner). I was
>born back on the West Coast.
>
>And in fact, my first encounter with "shirttail relative" wasn't
>through lots of people using it around me. It was from a passing
>comment on the radio was introducing a recording of a piece by William
>Bolcom, and admitted to being a shirttail relative of Bolcom's. That
>puzzled me, but I asked someone (possibly one my my parental units) and
>got an explanation. That explanation has been adequate for
>understanding the term on few additional encounters, and I never looked
>for a formal definition.
So it's quite widespread then.
wrote:
>Saturday, Steve Hayes quipped:
>> On Fri, 25 Dec 2015 before midnite, Snidely <snide...@gmail.com>
>
>(grouplist trimmed)
>
>> The description of "southern and mid-western US regional dialect"
>> given in the quoted source seems to me to fit with the El Paso--New
>> Orleans axis -- [...]
>> In the light of that, I'd be interested in knowing how close to that
>> axis you live or grew up, if the usage is familiar to you. It's a pity
>> you missed the original question in the midst of all the noise, since
>> you might have been able to answer it 15 months ago.
>>
>>
>Not very close at all. My dad started in Toledo, Ohio, but moved to
>Oregon as a youngster. As a young adult, he eventually made his way to
>NYC, where my mother was raised (German Lutheran Brooklyner). I was
>born back on the West Coast.
>
>And in fact, my first encounter with "shirttail relative" wasn't
>through lots of people using it around me. It was from a passing
>comment on the radio was introducing a recording of a piece by William
>Bolcom, and admitted to being a shirttail relative of Bolcom's. That
>puzzled me, but I asked someone (possibly one my my parental units) and
>got an explanation. That explanation has been adequate for
>understanding the term on few additional encounters, and I never looked
>for a formal definition.
Athel Cornish-Bowden
Dec 27, 2015, 6:03:03 AM12/27/15
to
opposite sex.
athel
Athel Cornish-Bowden
Dec 27, 2015, 6:11:43 AM12/27/15
to
On 2015-12-26 21:22:06 +0000, Peter Duncanson [BrE] said:
> On Sat, 26 Dec 2015 12:06:08 -0000 (UTC), Lewis
> <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>
>> In message <7n6s7bd728s05sdgr...@4ax.com>
>> Steve Hayes <haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>>> And this brought the answer to my question.
>>
>> As I recall, the question was answered in the original thread.
>
> I recall responsing to the matter of the existence of El Paso, Illinois,
> but I don't recall any discussion of "shirt-tail cousin".
I think that applies to all of us, except, apparently, Lewis. I'm
> On Sat, 26 Dec 2015 12:06:08 -0000 (UTC), Lewis
> <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>
>> In message <7n6s7bd728s05sdgr...@4ax.com>
>> Steve Hayes <haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>>> And this brought the answer to my question.
>>
>> As I recall, the question was answered in the original thread.
>
> I recall responsing to the matter of the existence of El Paso, Illinois,
> but I don't recall any discussion of "shirt-tail cousin".
hoping he will tell us who addressed Steve's query.
RH Draney
Dec 27, 2015, 7:00:51 AM12/27/15
to
someone else....r
CDB
Dec 27, 2015, 9:05:02 AM12/27/15
to
On 26/12/2015 12:02 PM, Joe Roberts wrote:
> Raised in southwestern Texas, I recall hearing two usages for the
> term "shirt-tail" (there might have been more).
> The first usage simply referred to distant relatives whom folks
> didn't bother to label in the genealogical sense. For example, no
> one referred to their third or fourth cousins, whether 'removed' or
> not, by that term. They were simply 'shirt-tail' cousins. There was
> nothing derogatory in it; it was light-hearted and for convenience in
> any conversation.
> The second referred to a male child who looked similar to his father
> or who went into same profession, as in: "he grew up on his daddy's
> shirttails'. It was similar to saying "he followed in his father's
> footsteps".
I've been wondering about its similarity to the political use of
> Raised in southwestern Texas, I recall hearing two usages for the
> term "shirt-tail" (there might have been more).
> The first usage simply referred to distant relatives whom folks
> didn't bother to label in the genealogical sense. For example, no
> one referred to their third or fourth cousins, whether 'removed' or
> not, by that term. They were simply 'shirt-tail' cousins. There was
> nothing derogatory in it; it was light-hearted and for convenience in
> any conversation.
> The second referred to a male child who looked similar to his father
> or who went into same profession, as in: "he grew up on his daddy's
> shirttails'. It was similar to saying "he followed in his father's
> footsteps".
"coat-tails", where a candidate wins election because of his or her
association with another, very popular, candidate. In the OP's case, a
distant connection or a connection by marriage would be a relative
because of being related to another, closer connection. In your second
use, the male child would be drawn into his father's appearance or
behaviour by that close connection.
Does that fit with your intuition as a user of the expression?
And a couple of questions more, if you will:
Are female children ever said to follow after their mothers, using any
similar expression?
Is there an accepted division of relatives into "shirt-tail cousins" and
"kissing cousins"?
> Also I'd like to apologize for the rudeness of that supercilious
> American. It was uncalled for. Hopefully he's not a shirt-tail
> cousin of mine.
Anyway, we have some of our own.
Steve Hayes
Dec 27, 2015, 9:56:48 AM12/27/15
to
On Sun, 27 Dec 2015 09:04:52 -0500, CDB <belle...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 26/12/2015 12:02 PM, Joe Roberts wrote:
>
>> Raised in southwestern Texas, I recall hearing two usages for the
>> term "shirt-tail" (there might have been more).
>
>> The first usage simply referred to distant relatives whom folks
>> didn't bother to label in the genealogical sense. For example, no
>> one referred to their third or fourth cousins, whether 'removed' or
>> not, by that term. They were simply 'shirt-tail' cousins. There was
>> nothing derogatory in it; it was light-hearted and for convenience in
>> any conversation.
>
>> The second referred to a male child who looked similar to his father
>> or who went into same profession, as in: "he grew up on his daddy's
>> shirttails'. It was similar to saying "he followed in his father's
>> footsteps".
>
>I've been wondering about its similarity to the political use of
>"coat-tails", where a candidate wins election because of his or her
>association with another, very popular, candidate. In the OP's case, a
>distant connection or a connection by marriage would be a relative
>because of being related to another, closer connection. In your second
>use, the male child would be drawn into his father's appearance or
>behaviour by that close connection.
The coat-tails usage has been familiar to me for a long time, and I've
>On 26/12/2015 12:02 PM, Joe Roberts wrote:
>
>> Raised in southwestern Texas, I recall hearing two usages for the
>> term "shirt-tail" (there might have been more).
>
>> The first usage simply referred to distant relatives whom folks
>> didn't bother to label in the genealogical sense. For example, no
>> one referred to their third or fourth cousins, whether 'removed' or
>> not, by that term. They were simply 'shirt-tail' cousins. There was
>> nothing derogatory in it; it was light-hearted and for convenience in
>> any conversation.
>
>> The second referred to a male child who looked similar to his father
>> or who went into same profession, as in: "he grew up on his daddy's
>> shirttails'. It was similar to saying "he followed in his father's
>> footsteps".
>
>I've been wondering about its similarity to the political use of
>"coat-tails", where a candidate wins election because of his or her
>association with another, very popular, candidate. In the OP's case, a
>distant connection or a connection by marriage would be a relative
>because of being related to another, closer connection. In your second
>use, the male child would be drawn into his father's appearance or
>behaviour by that close connection.
understood it with that meaning.
>Does that fit with your intuition as a user of the expression?
>
>And a couple of questions more, if you will:
>
>Are female children ever said to follow after their mothers, using any
>similar expression?
>
>Is there an accepted division of relatives into "shirt-tail cousins" and
>"kissing cousins"?
cousins, but I've never been sure of the meaning.
It seems to me it could mean:
1. Close cousins that you know and have grown up with , and greet with
a kiss, like uncles and aunts, as opposed to more distant cousins who
need a formal introduction because you don't know them at all.
or
2. Cousins sufficiently distant that you are able to marry them
without offending the mores and customs and possibly laws of your
society.
I think that too was discussed on alt.usage.english at one point,
though I don't recaqll any firm conclusion.
Charles Bishop
Dec 27, 2015, 10:11:08 AM12/27/15
to
In article <de9ur3...@mid.individual.net>,
My meaning isn't the same as Lewis', but it was never formally defined
for me, I had to assume the meaning from its use. I thought it had to do
with how close the relationship was and at some point the persons would
be greeted with a kiss on the cheek, and others greeted more formally.
It was used around me, I think, but I didn't use it in conversation.
--
charles
for me, I had to assume the meaning from its use. I thought it had to do
with how close the relationship was and at some point the persons would
be greeted with a kiss on the cheek, and others greeted more formally.
It was used around me, I think, but I didn't use it in conversation.
--
charles
Joe Roberts
Dec 27, 2015, 10:54:16 AM12/27/15
to
"CDB" <belle...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:n5or69$4ss$1...@speranza.aioe.org...
> On 26/12/2015 12:02 PM, Joe Roberts wrote:
>
>> Raised in southwestern Texas, I recall hearing two usages for the
>> term "shirt-tail" (there might have been more).
>
>> The first usage simply referred to distant relatives whom folks
>> didn't bother to label in the genealogical sense. For example, no
>> one referred to their third or fourth cousins, whether 'removed' or
>> not, by that term. They were simply 'shirt-tail' cousins. There was
>> nothing derogatory in it; it was light-hearted and for convenience in
>> any conversation.
>
>> The second referred to a male child who looked similar to his father
>> or who went into same profession, as in: "he grew up on his daddy's
>> shirttails'. It was similar to saying "he followed in his father's
>> footsteps".
>
> I've been wondering about its similarity to the political use of
> "coat-tails", where a candidate wins election because of his or her
> association with another, very popular, candidate. In the OP's case, a
> distant connection or a connection by marriage would be a relative
> because of being related to another, closer connection. In your second
> use, the male child would be drawn into his father's appearance or
> behaviour by that close connection.
>
> Does that fit with your intuition as a user of the expression?
Yes, indeed.
>
>> Raised in southwestern Texas, I recall hearing two usages for the
>> term "shirt-tail" (there might have been more).
>
>> The first usage simply referred to distant relatives whom folks
>> didn't bother to label in the genealogical sense. For example, no
>> one referred to their third or fourth cousins, whether 'removed' or
>> not, by that term. They were simply 'shirt-tail' cousins. There was
>> nothing derogatory in it; it was light-hearted and for convenience in
>> any conversation.
>
>> The second referred to a male child who looked similar to his father
>> or who went into same profession, as in: "he grew up on his daddy's
>> shirttails'. It was similar to saying "he followed in his father's
>> footsteps".
>
> I've been wondering about its similarity to the political use of
> "coat-tails", where a candidate wins election because of his or her
> association with another, very popular, candidate. In the OP's case, a
> distant connection or a connection by marriage would be a relative
> because of being related to another, closer connection. In your second
> use, the male child would be drawn into his father's appearance or
> behaviour by that close connection.
>
> Does that fit with your intuition as a user of the expression?
>
> And a couple of questions more, if you will:
>
> Are female children ever said to follow after their mothers, using any
> similar expression?
"apron strings".
... Er, there's a bit of sexism in that ... now it might be becoming
socially incorrect.
>
> Is there an accepted division of relatives into "shirt-tail cousins" and
> "kissing cousins"?
opinions on that between the ones talking and the ones being talked about.
>
>> Also I'd like to apologize for the rudeness of that supercilious
>> American. It was uncalled for. Hopefully he's not a shirt-tail
>> cousin of mine.
>
> One of yours? Didn't see anything that called for embarrassment. Anyway,
> we have some of our own.
course.
... What, never? No, never! What, never? Well ..... hardly ever.
Cheers,
Joe
Jerry Friedman
Dec 27, 2015, 11:18:02 AM12/27/15
to
On Saturday, December 26, 2015 at 12:08:00 AM UTC-5, Steve Hayes wrote:
> About 40 years ago an American relative used a term, "shirt-tail
> cousin", that was unfamiliar to me. I did not know her well, and was
> too shy to ask what she meant by it in case she took offence. Last
> year I asked about it on an English usage forum, and mentioned that
> she came from El Paso, Illinois, and later lived in New Orleans, to
> give a clue to her dialect area, in case anyone knew about such
> things. This request was treated with a great deal of rudeness by a
> supercilious American, who accused me of inventing a place with a
> Spanish name in Illinois, but had no reliable information on the
> meaning of the term.
Nothing justifies his rudeness or his error, but you had gone out
> About 40 years ago an American relative used a term, "shirt-tail
> cousin", that was unfamiliar to me. I did not know her well, and was
> too shy to ask what she meant by it in case she took offence. Last
> year I asked about it on an English usage forum, and mentioned that
> she came from El Paso, Illinois, and later lived in New Orleans, to
> give a clue to her dialect area, in case anyone knew about such
> things. This request was treated with a great deal of rudeness by a
> supercilious American, who accused me of inventing a place with a
> Spanish name in Illinois, but had no reliable information on the
> meaning of the term.
of your way to rattle his cage in that thread. (I just looked back
at it.)
> So yesterday I blogged about it. Since it was Christmas day, it also
> seemed a suitable opportunity to post a picture of the cousin I
> referred to, taken on Christmas day in 1981, and the blog post is
> here.
>
> https://t.co/pwAnayyTnF
>
> And this brought the answer to my question. The English usage forum
> just produced a great deal of acrimonious discussion with no useful
> information. The blog post prompted a cousin to find the answer to my
> question here:
> I have a Facebook friend whom I describe as my "step fourth
> cousin-in-law once removed" (her stepfather was my wife's fourth
> cousin once removed). I think I can now refer to her as a "shirttail
> cousin" for short.
know the expression, it might not be well known in S. A.
> Maybe my mistake was Googling for "shirt-tail cousin" with a hyphen
> instead of "shirttail relative", but at any rate, the blog post
> produced the information I was looking for, whereas a query in the
> appropriate newsgroup didn't, so I conclude that blogging's better.
And if you decide to repeat the experiment, I suggest you try to avoid
provoking anyone.
--
Jerry Friedman
Jerry Friedman
Dec 27, 2015, 11:19:01 AM12/27/15
to
says it's the second.
kissing cousin n. a relative or friend with whom one is on close enough terms to greet with a kiss; also transf.
1951 in H. Wentworth & S. B. Flexner Dict. Amer. Slang (1960) 306/2 You guys talk like kissing cousins.
1961 John o' London's 20 Apr. 436/3 Marianne Spottiswoode, who is also a kissing cousin of the publishing Spottiswoodes.
1961 Economist 18 Nov. 676/2 The relationship will be more on the order of 'kissing cousins'--the experience gained will be valuable for later and more serious efforts.
1970 Guardian 31 Aug. 7/4 We resemble the Dutch more than we resemble the people of any other country--we are truly kissing cousins.
1973 Publishers Weekly 25 June 33/2 (advt.) From cream pies to their kissing cousins, souffles.
--
Jerry Friedman
Lewis
Dec 27, 2015, 11:30:20 AM12/27/15
to
In message <de9ur3...@mid.individual.net>
No. For many people first cousins are considered too close, and for many
Americans, *any* know cousin relationship is too close.
There was an episode of 30 Rock where two characters who'd been having
sex were disgusted, shocked, and horrified to discover they were
something like 5th cousins.
Yes, I know.
--
Belief is one of the most powerful organic forces in the multiverse. It
may not be able to move mountains, exactly. But it can create someone
who can.
Americans, *any* know cousin relationship is too close.
There was an episode of 30 Rock where two characters who'd been having
sex were disgusted, shocked, and horrified to discover they were
something like 5th cousins.
Yes, I know.
--
Belief is one of the most powerful organic forces in the multiverse. It
may not be able to move mountains, exactly. But it can create someone
who can.
Athel Cornish-Bowden
Dec 27, 2015, 12:01:59 PM12/27/15
to
On 2015-12-27 16:27:40 +0000, Lewis said:
> In message <de9ur3...@mid.individual.net>
> Athel Cornish-Bowden <acor...@imm.cnrs.fr> wrote:
>> On 2015-12-26 22:37:30 +0000, Lewis said:
>
>>> In message <n5n336$1gp$1...@dont-email.me>
>>> Joe Roberts <shoreh...@att.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Snidely" wrote:
>>>
>>>>> (grouplist trimmed ... snip for brevity, please see the original post)
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> "What do you think of my cart, Miss Morland? A neat one, is not it? Well
>>>>> hung: curricle-hung in fact. Come sit by me and we'll test the springs."
>>>>> (Speculative fiction by H.Lacedaemonian.)
>>>
>>>> Hmmm ...
>>>
>>>> Kissin' cousins, perhaps?
>>>
>>> Maybe, but most people seem to not know what that phrase means. It does
>>> not mean "cousin you are especially close to" but rather, "cousins it's
>>> OK to have sex with."
>
>> That's to say all cousins, if they're of age, and, in the past, of the
>> opposite sex.
>
> No. For many people first cousins are considered too close,
Not if you've been brought up in the bosom of the Church of England
> In message <de9ur3...@mid.individual.net>
> Athel Cornish-Bowden <acor...@imm.cnrs.fr> wrote:
>> On 2015-12-26 22:37:30 +0000, Lewis said:
>
>>> In message <n5n336$1gp$1...@dont-email.me>
>>> Joe Roberts <shoreh...@att.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Snidely" wrote:
>>>
>>>>> (grouplist trimmed ... snip for brevity, please see the original post)
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> "What do you think of my cart, Miss Morland? A neat one, is not it? Well
>>>>> hung: curricle-hung in fact. Come sit by me and we'll test the springs."
>>>>> (Speculative fiction by H.Lacedaemonian.)
>>>
>>>> Hmmm ...
>>>
>>>> Kissin' cousins, perhaps?
>>>
>>> Maybe, but most people seem to not know what that phrase means. It does
>>> not mean "cousin you are especially close to" but rather, "cousins it's
>>> OK to have sex with."
>
>> That's to say all cousins, if they're of age, and, in the past, of the
>> opposite sex.
>
> No. For many people first cousins are considered too close,
they aren't. Charles Darwin's wife Emma was his first cousin.
> and for many
> Americans, *any* know cousin relationship is too close.
>
> There was an episode of 30 Rock where two characters who'd been having
> sex were disgusted, shocked, and horrified to discover they were
> something like 5th cousins.
>
> Yes, I know.
--
athel
CDB
Dec 27, 2015, 12:32:47 PM12/27/15
to
On 27/12/2015 10:54 AM, Joe Roberts wrote:
Thanks. I thought of apron-strings, but I didn't want to prompt a response.
>> Is there an accepted division of relatives into "shirt-tail
>> cousins" and "kissing cousins"?
> Get a bunch of cousins together, and I'll bet there'll be some
> differing opinions on that between the ones talking and the ones
> being talked about.
>>> Also I'd like to apologize for the rudeness of that supercilious
>>> American. It was uncalled for. Hopefully he's not a shirt-tail
>>> cousin of mine.
>> One of yours? Didn't see anything that called for embarrassment.
>> Anyway, we have some of our own.
> Oh, no, no, never ... We have only the nicest apples on our family
> tree, of course.
> ... What, never? No, never! What, never? Well ..... hardly ever.
I don't doubt it, even without the disclaimer. By "yours" I meant only
"posting from one of the genealogy groups listed above", where I presume
you hang out too.
>> Is there an accepted division of relatives into "shirt-tail
>> cousins" and "kissing cousins"?
> Get a bunch of cousins together, and I'll bet there'll be some
> differing opinions on that between the ones talking and the ones
> being talked about.
>>> Also I'd like to apologize for the rudeness of that supercilious
>>> American. It was uncalled for. Hopefully he's not a shirt-tail
>>> cousin of mine.
>> One of yours? Didn't see anything that called for embarrassment.
>> Anyway, we have some of our own.
> Oh, no, no, never ... We have only the nicest apples on our family
> tree, of course.
> ... What, never? No, never! What, never? Well ..... hardly ever.
"posting from one of the genealogy groups listed above", where I presume
you hang out too.
Janet
Dec 27, 2015, 1:52:01 PM12/27/15
to
In article <deajs0...@mid.individual.net>, acor...@imm.cnrs.fr
says...
mother's brother.
Janet
says...
>
> On 2015-12-27 16:27:40 +0000, Lewis said:
>
> > In message <de9ur3...@mid.individual.net>
> > Athel Cornish-Bowden <acor...@imm.cnrs.fr> wrote:
> >> On 2015-12-26 22:37:30 +0000, Lewis said:
> >
> >>> In message <n5n336$1gp$1...@dont-email.me>
> >>> Joe Roberts <shoreh...@att.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> "Snidely" wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>> (grouplist trimmed ... snip for brevity, please see the original post)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> "What do you think of my cart, Miss Morland? A neat one, is not it? Well
> >>>>> hung: curricle-hung in fact. Come sit by me and we'll test the springs."
> >>>>> (Speculative fiction by H.Lacedaemonian.)
> >>>
> >>>> Hmmm ...
> >>>
> >>>> Kissin' cousins, perhaps?
> >>>
> >>> Maybe, but most people seem to not know what that phrase means. It does
> >>> not mean "cousin you are especially close to" but rather, "cousins it's
> >>> OK to have sex with."
> >
> >> That's to say all cousins, if they're of age, and, in the past, of the
> >> opposite sex.
> >
> > No. For many people first cousins are considered too close,
>
> Not if you've been brought up in the bosom of the Church of England
> they aren't. Charles Darwin's wife Emma was his first cousin.
Queen Victoria married her first cousin Albert, the son of her
> On 2015-12-27 16:27:40 +0000, Lewis said:
>
> > In message <de9ur3...@mid.individual.net>
> > Athel Cornish-Bowden <acor...@imm.cnrs.fr> wrote:
> >> On 2015-12-26 22:37:30 +0000, Lewis said:
> >
> >>> In message <n5n336$1gp$1...@dont-email.me>
> >>> Joe Roberts <shoreh...@att.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> "Snidely" wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>> (grouplist trimmed ... snip for brevity, please see the original post)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> "What do you think of my cart, Miss Morland? A neat one, is not it? Well
> >>>>> hung: curricle-hung in fact. Come sit by me and we'll test the springs."
> >>>>> (Speculative fiction by H.Lacedaemonian.)
> >>>
> >>>> Hmmm ...
> >>>
> >>>> Kissin' cousins, perhaps?
> >>>
> >>> Maybe, but most people seem to not know what that phrase means. It does
> >>> not mean "cousin you are especially close to" but rather, "cousins it's
> >>> OK to have sex with."
> >
> >> That's to say all cousins, if they're of age, and, in the past, of the
> >> opposite sex.
> >
> > No. For many people first cousins are considered too close,
>
> Not if you've been brought up in the bosom of the Church of England
> they aren't. Charles Darwin's wife Emma was his first cousin.
mother's brother.
Janet
Cheryl
Dec 27, 2015, 3:46:22 PM12/27/15
to
brought up in. I was brought up in what was then called the Church of
England - it was later called the Anglican Church of Canada - and
marriage with first cousins was considered as unthinkable as marrying a
sibling, with marriage with more distant cousins being undesirable at
the least. And it didn't matter in the least that such marriages were
not forbidden in the Table of Kindred and Affinity in the prayer book.
What people did back in the UK, especially among the rich who were known
to have made politically and financially advantageous marriages among
their kin for years, was irrelevant.
--
Cheryl
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Janet
Dec 27, 2015, 4:03:47 PM12/27/15
to
In article <deb10r...@mid.individual.net>, cper...@mun.ca says...
Marriage between first cousins is still legal in UK .
Janet
Janet
Joe Roberts
Dec 27, 2015, 4:16:29 PM12/27/15
to
"CDB" wrote:
>>> Joe Roberts wrote:
>
>> We have only the nicest apples on our family
>> tree, of course.
>
> I don't doubt it, even without the disclaimer. By "yours" I meant only
> "posting from one of the genealogy groups listed above", where I presume
> you hang out too.
Well, we do have a couple of apples who might be politely excluded from
> "posting from one of the genealogy groups listed above", where I presume
> you hang out too.
baking in the family pie. But then, in family discussions, we could
disburden ourselves by using the term "shirt-tail" cousins, thereby
maintaining a discreet distance.
Cheers,
Joe
Cheryl
Dec 27, 2015, 6:16:09 PM12/27/15
to
just, at least in my part of Canada, regarded with such extreme
disapproval that it rarely occurs. And that's not because of a religious
prohibition, at least, not among Anglicans. I have heard the theory that
the antipathy of cousin marriage is rooted in the eugenics movement, but
that wasn't particularly strong in my province, and I suspect, although
I haven't researched the matter, that the disapproval goes back further.
The problems of consanguinity in a population that was traditionally
dispersed in small isolated villages were known, and may have encouraged
out-marriage and discouraged marriage between cousins.
David Kleinecke
Dec 27, 2015, 6:32:15 PM12/27/15
to
exogamy, In the patrilocal version the men found wives from other tribes
and the women went off some other tribe. An important concern for the
men was (and may still be) that their wives had too little in common to
combine against them. It did keep the gene pool mixed up.
Mark Brader
Dec 27, 2015, 8:00:28 PM12/27/15
to
Cheryl Perkins:
Hmm. It's not polite to ask a lady her age, but was this in Canada?
If so, do you know when they changed the name?
--
Mark Brader, Toronto | "I've always wanted to be a mad scientist!
m...@vex.net | Or perhaps just mad!" -- Robert L. Biddle
> I was brought up in what was then called the Church of England -
> it was later called the Anglican Church of Canada...
Hmm. It's not polite to ask a lady her age, but was this in Canada?
If so, do you know when they changed the name?
--
Mark Brader, Toronto | "I've always wanted to be a mad scientist!
m...@vex.net | Or perhaps just mad!" -- Robert L. Biddle
Steve Hayes
Dec 27, 2015, 8:22:38 PM12/27/15
to
apron strings".
Peter T. Daniels
Dec 27, 2015, 11:10:20 PM12/27/15
to
On Sunday, December 27, 2015 at 8:00:28 PM UTC-5, Mark Brader wrote:
> Cheryl Perkins:
> > I was brought up in what was then called the Church of England -
> > it was later called the Anglican Church of Canada...
>
> Hmm. It's not polite to ask a lady her age, but was this in Canada?
> If so, do you know when they changed the name?
It was in Newfoundland, of course. Which, you may recall, wasn't part of
> Cheryl Perkins:
> > I was brought up in what was then called the Church of England -
> > it was later called the Anglican Church of Canada...
>
> Hmm. It's not polite to ask a lady her age, but was this in Canada?
> If so, do you know when they changed the name?
Canada until 1949.
Snidely
Dec 28, 2015, 2:37:24 AM12/28/15
to
On Sunday, Athel Cornish-Bowden pointed out that ...
the ten Darwin children, most were sickly. Three proved infertile as
adults, and three died young, roughly double the child mortality rate
in England." Kean, _The Violinist's Thumb_, pg 251
"While most children born to first cousins are healthy (well north of
90 percent), they do have higher risks for birth defects and medical
problems, and the numbers can creep higher still in unlucky families."
(ibid)
/dps
/dps
--
The presence of this syntax results from the fact that SQLite is really
a Tcl extension that has escaped into the wild.
<http://www.sqlite.org/lang_expr.html>
> On 2015-12-27 16:27:40 +0000, Lewis said:
>> No. For many people first cousins are considered too close,
>
> Not if you've been brought up in the bosom of the Church of England they
> aren't. Charles Darwin's wife Emma was his first cousin.
Which appears to have contributed to their offspring's ill health. "Of
>> No. For many people first cousins are considered too close,
>
> Not if you've been brought up in the bosom of the Church of England they
> aren't. Charles Darwin's wife Emma was his first cousin.
the ten Darwin children, most were sickly. Three proved infertile as
adults, and three died young, roughly double the child mortality rate
in England." Kean, _The Violinist's Thumb_, pg 251
"While most children born to first cousins are healthy (well north of
90 percent), they do have higher risks for birth defects and medical
problems, and the numbers can creep higher still in unlucky families."
(ibid)
/dps
/dps
--
The presence of this syntax results from the fact that SQLite is really
a Tcl extension that has escaped into the wild.
<http://www.sqlite.org/lang_expr.html>
Peter Duncanson [BrE]
Dec 28, 2015, 6:45:28 AM12/28/15
to
On Sun, 27 Dec 2015 23:37:14 -0800, Snidely <snide...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>On Sunday, Athel Cornish-Bowden pointed out that ...
>> On 2015-12-27 16:27:40 +0000, Lewis said:
>
>>> No. For many people first cousins are considered too close,
>>
>> Not if you've been brought up in the bosom of the Church of England they
>> aren't. Charles Darwin's wife Emma was his first cousin.
>
>Which appears to have contributed to their offspring's ill health. "Of
>the ten Darwin children, most were sickly. Three proved infertile as
>adults, and three died young, roughly double the child mortality rate
>in England." Kean, _The Violinist's Thumb_, pg 251
>
>"While most children born to first cousins are healthy (well north of
>90 percent), they do have higher risks for birth defects and medical
>problems, and the numbers can creep higher still in unlucky families."
>(ibid)
>
It's a miracle that humans exist considering that our shared ancestor,
Adam, produced children with Eve who wasn't a cousin or sister but was
made from his own body. He reproduced using a separated part of himself,
allegedly.
That's extreme consanguinity.
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
wrote:
>On Sunday, Athel Cornish-Bowden pointed out that ...
>> On 2015-12-27 16:27:40 +0000, Lewis said:
>
>>> No. For many people first cousins are considered too close,
>>
>> Not if you've been brought up in the bosom of the Church of England they
>> aren't. Charles Darwin's wife Emma was his first cousin.
>
>Which appears to have contributed to their offspring's ill health. "Of
>the ten Darwin children, most were sickly. Three proved infertile as
>adults, and three died young, roughly double the child mortality rate
>in England." Kean, _The Violinist's Thumb_, pg 251
>
>"While most children born to first cousins are healthy (well north of
>90 percent), they do have higher risks for birth defects and medical
>problems, and the numbers can creep higher still in unlucky families."
>(ibid)
>
Adam, produced children with Eve who wasn't a cousin or sister but was
made from his own body. He reproduced using a separated part of himself,
allegedly.
That's extreme consanguinity.
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
Cheryl
Dec 28, 2015, 7:22:27 AM12/28/15
to
On 2015-12-27 9:30 PM, Mark Brader wrote:
> Cheryl Perkins:
>> I was brought up in what was then called the Church of England -
>> it was later called the Anglican Church of Canada...
>
> Hmm. It's not polite to ask a lady her age, but was this in Canada?
> If so, do you know when they changed the name?
>
I had to look it up - 1955. In rural Newfoundland, "Church of England"
> Cheryl Perkins:
>> I was brought up in what was then called the Church of England -
>> it was later called the Anglican Church of Canada...
>
> Hmm. It's not polite to ask a lady her age, but was this in Canada?
> If so, do you know when they changed the name?
>
or "C or E" was in common use well after this year. I can't remember
specific dates, but it must have been 5 or 10 years later that I heard
that we weren't supposed to be using C of E any more.
Janet
Dec 28, 2015, 7:40:45 AM12/28/15
to
In article <0i318b96vh150icbv...@4ax.com>,
haye...@telkomsa.net says...
+1. Or "she needs to cut the apron strings " meaning, Mother needs to
let her son grow up and be independent.
Janet.
haye...@telkomsa.net says...
let her son grow up and be independent.
Janet.
Athel Cornish-Bowden
Dec 28, 2015, 11:47:23 AM12/28/15
to
More seriously, the Pharoahs seemed to have gone through quite a few
generations of brother-sister unions while still producing viable
offspring.
Highly inbred strains of animals like rats are very widely used in
laboratories, and although they wouldn't survive in the wild they can
be quite healthy in laboratory conditions.
--
athel
Rich Ulrich
Dec 28, 2015, 1:04:46 PM12/28/15
to
On Mon, 28 Dec 2015 12:40:37 -0000, Janet <nob...@home.org> wrote:
>
> +1. Or "she needs to cut the apron strings " meaning, Mother needs to
>let her son grow up and be independent.
Long ago, in a book by a social anthropologist, I was struck
>
> +1. Or "she needs to cut the apron strings " meaning, Mother needs to
>let her son grow up and be independent.
by the observation that one of the biggest differences
between societies was how much they expected sons to
remain attached to the apron strings, all their lives.
It occurs to me today that I do not recollect there being
evidence in that book about that. And I don't think of
other evidence grabbing my attention in all the years since then.
Does anybody admire apron strings?
--
Rich Ulrich
Cheryl
Dec 28, 2015, 2:19:58 PM12/28/15
to
level of care and attention a son pays to his mother is considered
appropriate, he's a good son. If they're considered excessive, he's tied
to her apron strings. I expect exactly the same behaviour would be
considered either proper love and attention from a son or signs of apron
strings in different cultures, or even different families. There's also
the way in which closeness is expressed - in some cultures, the son is
expected to defer to the matriarch, who rules everything inside the
home. In others, the son is expected to care for the mother more as a
dependent child - even when she isn't in need of that type of care, for
example, due to illness.
And some mothers favour sons over daughters, and are much inclined to
keep them close and, their daughters would say, spoiled, while expecting
actual help from the daughters.
What's the old saying - something about a son is your son until he takes
him a wife; a daughter is a daughter all your life? That comes from
people among whom the son is supposed to break the apron strings - and
maybe attach himself to his wife's.
Lewis
Dec 28, 2015, 2:45:30 PM12/28/15
to
In message <mn.dd897dfc4f7439a5.127094@snitoo>
First cousin marriages *are* more likely to result in birth defect. Very
slightly more likely.
> "While most children born to first cousins are healthy (well north of
> 90 percent), they do have higher risks for birth defects and medical
> problems, and the numbers can creep higher still in unlucky families."
The trouble with "higher risk: is that 3/100,000 is "higher" than
2.7/100,000.
--
Overhead, without any fuss, the stars were going out.
Snidely <snide...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sunday, Athel Cornish-Bowden pointed out that ...
>> On 2015-12-27 16:27:40 +0000, Lewis said:
>>> No. For many people first cousins are considered too close,
>>
>> Not if you've been brought up in the bosom of the Church of England they
>> aren't. Charles Darwin's wife Emma was his first cousin.
> Which appears to have contributed to their offspring's ill health. "Of
> the ten Darwin children, most were sickly. Three proved infertile as
> adults, and three died young, roughly double the child mortality rate
> in England." Kean, _The Violinist's Thumb_, pg 251
Correlation is not causation.
> On Sunday, Athel Cornish-Bowden pointed out that ...
>> On 2015-12-27 16:27:40 +0000, Lewis said:
>>> No. For many people first cousins are considered too close,
>>
>> Not if you've been brought up in the bosom of the Church of England they
>> aren't. Charles Darwin's wife Emma was his first cousin.
> Which appears to have contributed to their offspring's ill health. "Of
> the ten Darwin children, most were sickly. Three proved infertile as
> adults, and three died young, roughly double the child mortality rate
> in England." Kean, _The Violinist's Thumb_, pg 251
First cousin marriages *are* more likely to result in birth defect. Very
slightly more likely.
> "While most children born to first cousins are healthy (well north of
> 90 percent), they do have higher risks for birth defects and medical
> problems, and the numbers can creep higher still in unlucky families."
2.7/100,000.
--
Overhead, without any fuss, the stars were going out.
snide...@gmail.com
Dec 28, 2015, 3:06:52 PM12/28/15
to
On Monday, December 28, 2015 at 11:45:30 AM UTC-8, Lewis wrote:
> In message <mn.dd897dfc4f7439a5.127094@snitoo>
> Snidely <snide...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sunday, Athel Cornish-Bowden pointed out that ...
> >> On 2015-12-27 16:27:40 +0000, Lewis said:
>
> >>> No. For many people first cousins are considered too close,
> >>
> >> Not if you've been brought up in the bosom of the Church of England they
> >> aren't. Charles Darwin's wife Emma was his first cousin.
>
> > Which appears to have contributed to their offspring's ill health. "Of
> > the ten Darwin children, most were sickly. Three proved infertile as
> > adults, and three died young, roughly double the child mortality rate
> > in England." Kean, _The Violinist's Thumb_, pg 251
>
> Correlation is not causation.
>
> First cousin marriages *are* more likely to result in birth defect. Very
> slightly more likely.
Less than 10% of children born to FCMs, apparently.
> In message <mn.dd897dfc4f7439a5.127094@snitoo>
> Snidely <snide...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sunday, Athel Cornish-Bowden pointed out that ...
> >> On 2015-12-27 16:27:40 +0000, Lewis said:
>
> >>> No. For many people first cousins are considered too close,
> >>
> >> Not if you've been brought up in the bosom of the Church of England they
> >> aren't. Charles Darwin's wife Emma was his first cousin.
>
> > Which appears to have contributed to their offspring's ill health. "Of
> > the ten Darwin children, most were sickly. Three proved infertile as
> > adults, and three died young, roughly double the child mortality rate
> > in England." Kean, _The Violinist's Thumb_, pg 251
>
> Correlation is not causation.
>
> First cousin marriages *are* more likely to result in birth defect. Very
> slightly more likely.
>
> > "While most children born to first cousins are healthy (well north of
> > 90 percent), they do have higher risks for birth defects and medical
> > problems, and the numbers can creep higher still in unlucky families."
>
> The trouble with "higher risk: is that 3/100,000 is "higher" than
> 2.7/100,000.
an arbitrary arithmetical illustration?
/dps
snide...@gmail.com
Dec 28, 2015, 3:20:15 PM12/28/15
to
On Monday, December 28, 2015 at 11:45:30 AM UTC-8, Lewis wrote:
> In message <mn.dd897dfc4f7439a5.127094@snitoo>
> Snidely <snide...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sunday, Athel Cornish-Bowden pointed out that ...
> >> On 2015-12-27 16:27:40 +0000, Lewis said:
>
> >>> No. For many people first cousins are considered too close,
> >>
> >> Not if you've been brought up in the bosom of the Church of England they
> >> aren't. Charles Darwin's wife Emma was his first cousin.
>
> > Which appears to have contributed to their offspring's ill health. "Of
> > the ten Darwin children, most were sickly. Three proved infertile as
> > adults, and three died young, roughly double the child mortality rate
> > in England." Kean, _The Violinist's Thumb_, pg 251
>
> Correlation is not causation.
And indeed, Kean admits that in the absence of DNA samples from Charles,
> Snidely <snide...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sunday, Athel Cornish-Bowden pointed out that ...
> >> On 2015-12-27 16:27:40 +0000, Lewis said:
>
> >>> No. For many people first cousins are considered too close,
> >>
> >> Not if you've been brought up in the bosom of the Church of England they
> >> aren't. Charles Darwin's wife Emma was his first cousin.
>
> > Which appears to have contributed to their offspring's ill health. "Of
> > the ten Darwin children, most were sickly. Three proved infertile as
> > adults, and three died young, roughly double the child mortality rate
> > in England." Kean, _The Violinist's Thumb_, pg 251
>
> Correlation is not causation.
it is unlikely that any particular causation can be determined,
and that inbreeding may be a red herring. But correlation can be
an indication of where to look, and will remain so for the Darwins.
(Charles did plant experiments to study inbreeding,
and it appears that part of the reason was his retrospective concern over FCMs.)
Henri Toulouse-Lautrec is a stronger case against FCMs,
but then there were several generations involved.
And he came out better than the Hapsburg's Charles II.
>
> First cousin marriages *are* more likely to result in birth defect. Very
> slightly more likely.
>
> > "While most children born to first cousins are healthy (well north of
> > 90 percent), they do have higher risks for birth defects and medical
> > problems, and the numbers can creep higher still in unlucky families."
>
> The trouble with "higher risk: is that 3/100,000 is "higher" than
> 2.7/100,000.
/dps
Richard Tobin
Dec 28, 2015, 3:25:03 PM12/28/15
to
In article <deb9pl...@mid.individual.net>, Cheryl <cper...@mun.ca> wrote:
>> Marriage between first cousins is still legal in UK .
>> Marriage between first cousins is still legal in UK .
>It's legal in Canada, too.
And in Shelbyville.
-- Richard
snide...@gmail.com
Dec 28, 2015, 3:31:05 PM12/28/15
to
but there was a break in lineage after King Tut,
whose offspring didn't last long (5 months and 7 months).
Tut himself had both the family clubfoot and cleft palate.
I'd have to do some research to determine how often different branches
took over in the various dynasties.
The Hawaiian royalty also practiced brother-sister marriage,
but were reportedly quite aggressive about removing birth defects.
I don't have any real documentation about that, though.
Lewis
Dec 28, 2015, 4:15:48 PM12/28/15
to
In message <c50b1d39-cee4-463f...@googlegroups.com>
Just making up an example. Real numbers would be much higher.
121/100,000 is the death rate for infants due to birth defect according
to the CDC. Obviously "sickly" or long-term medical issues would be a
higher number.
<http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/birth-defects.htm>
--
"Woof bloody woof."
121/100,000 is the death rate for infants due to birth defect according
to the CDC. Obviously "sickly" or long-term medical issues would be a
higher number.
<http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/birth-defects.htm>
--
"Woof bloody woof."
Lewis
Dec 28, 2015, 4:18:52 PM12/28/15
to
In message <d1be828b-79c7-483e...@googlegroups.com>
or so, but they are all there. Claiming that the first cousin was the
cause of the Darwin's issues with their children without any evidence at
all beyond "first cousins married? ooo, ick" is irresponsible.
--
"I don't care if Bill Gates is the world's biggest philanthropist. The
pain he has inflicted on the world in the past 20 years through lousy
products easily outweighs any good he has done.... Apple is as arrogant
as Microsoft but at least its stuff works as advertised" - Graem Philipson
snide...@gmail.com <snide...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, December 28, 2015 at 11:45:30 AM UTC-8, Lewis wrote:
>> In message <mn.dd897dfc4f7439a5.127094@snitoo>
>> Snidely <snide...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Sunday, Athel Cornish-Bowden pointed out that ...
>> >> On 2015-12-27 16:27:40 +0000, Lewis said:
>>
>> >>> No. For many people first cousins are considered too close,
>> >>
>> >> Not if you've been brought up in the bosom of the Church of England they
>> >> aren't. Charles Darwin's wife Emma was his first cousin.
>>
>> > Which appears to have contributed to their offspring's ill health. "Of
>> > the ten Darwin children, most were sickly. Three proved infertile as
>> > adults, and three died young, roughly double the child mortality rate
>> > in England." Kean, _The Violinist's Thumb_, pg 251
>>
>> Correlation is not causation.
> And indeed, Kean admits that in the absence of DNA samples from Charles,
> it is unlikely that any particular causation can be determined,
> and that inbreeding may be a red herring. But correlation can be
> an indication of where to look, and will remain so for the Darwins.
*Every* family tree will have first cousin marriages. Mostly before 1870
> On Monday, December 28, 2015 at 11:45:30 AM UTC-8, Lewis wrote:
>> In message <mn.dd897dfc4f7439a5.127094@snitoo>
>> Snidely <snide...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Sunday, Athel Cornish-Bowden pointed out that ...
>> >> On 2015-12-27 16:27:40 +0000, Lewis said:
>>
>> >>> No. For many people first cousins are considered too close,
>> >>
>> >> Not if you've been brought up in the bosom of the Church of England they
>> >> aren't. Charles Darwin's wife Emma was his first cousin.
>>
>> > Which appears to have contributed to their offspring's ill health. "Of
>> > the ten Darwin children, most were sickly. Three proved infertile as
>> > adults, and three died young, roughly double the child mortality rate
>> > in England." Kean, _The Violinist's Thumb_, pg 251
>>
>> Correlation is not causation.
> And indeed, Kean admits that in the absence of DNA samples from Charles,
> it is unlikely that any particular causation can be determined,
> and that inbreeding may be a red herring. But correlation can be
> an indication of where to look, and will remain so for the Darwins.
or so, but they are all there. Claiming that the first cousin was the
cause of the Darwin's issues with their children without any evidence at
all beyond "first cousins married? ooo, ick" is irresponsible.
--
"I don't care if Bill Gates is the world's biggest philanthropist. The
pain he has inflicted on the world in the past 20 years through lousy
products easily outweighs any good he has done.... Apple is as arrogant
as Microsoft but at least its stuff works as advertised" - Graem Philipson
Athel Cornish-Bowden
Dec 28, 2015, 4:26:20 PM12/28/15
to
free of defects.
In the case of laboratory strains of ratd, I'm sure they didn't just
choose any pair of albino rats and breed from them but instead bred
from the lines that survived the early generations in reasonable shape.
However, the wild golden hamsters found in Israel are thought to be
descendants from a very small family group, and are apparently good at
surviving. Golden hamsters kept as pets elsewhere have been claimed to
be descendants of a single pair.
> but there was a break in lineage after King Tut,
> whose offspring didn't last long (5 months and 7 months).
> Tut himself had both the family clubfoot and cleft palate.
> I'd have to do some research to determine how often different branches
> took over in the various dynasties.
series about Tutankhamon. I believe its original title was just "Tut",
which would have ensured that I wouldn't watch it, but here it was
called "Toutânkhamon : Le Pharaon maudit". It wasn't very good, but I
was feeling quite ill on Christmas Day (not from eating too much,
because we didn't) and it passed the time. It was too much of a modern
soap opera, but I did wonder how much, if anything, was based on
historical fact. His club foot wasn't much in evidence, and didn't
prevent him from playing a very active role in a war.
>
> The Hawaiian royalty also practiced brother-sister marriage,
> but were reportedly quite aggressive about removing birth defects.
> I don't have any real documentation about that, though.
--
> The Hawaiian royalty also practiced brother-sister marriage,
> but were reportedly quite aggressive about removing birth defects.
> I don't have any real documentation about that, though.
athel
Athel Cornish-Bowden
Dec 28, 2015, 4:41:50 PM12/28/15
to
On 2015-12-28 21:16:14 +0000, Lewis said:
> In message <d1be828b-79c7-483e...@googlegroups.com>
> snide...@gmail.com <snide...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Monday, December 28, 2015 at 11:45:30 AM UTC-8, Lewis wrote:
>>> In message <mn.dd897dfc4f7439a5.127094@snitoo>
>>> Snidely <snide...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Sunday, Athel Cornish-Bowden pointed out that ...
>>>>> On 2015-12-27 16:27:40 +0000, Lewis said:
>>>
>>>>>> No. For many people first cousins are considered too close,
>>>>>
>>>>> Not if you've been brought up in the bosom of the Church of England they
>>>>> aren't. Charles Darwin's wife Emma was his first cousin.
>>>
>>>> Which appears to have contributed to their offspring's ill health. "Of
>>>> the ten Darwin children, most were sickly. Three proved infertile as
>>>> adults, and three died young, roughly double the child mortality rate
>>>> in England." Kean, _The Violinist's Thumb_, pg 251
>>>
>>> Correlation is not causation.
>
>> And indeed, Kean admits that in the absence of DNA samples from Charles,
>> it is unlikely that any particular causation can be determined,
>> and that inbreeding may be a red herring. But correlation can be
>> an indication of where to look, and will remain so for the Darwins.
>
> *Every* family tree will have first cousin marriages. Mostly before 1870
> or so, but they are all there. Claiming that the first cousin was the
> cause of the Darwin's issues with their children without any evidence at
> all beyond "first cousins married? ooo, ick" is irresponsible.
Yes. There are several examples I know of in my family, the closest (to
> In message <d1be828b-79c7-483e...@googlegroups.com>
> snide...@gmail.com <snide...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Monday, December 28, 2015 at 11:45:30 AM UTC-8, Lewis wrote:
>>> In message <mn.dd897dfc4f7439a5.127094@snitoo>
>>> Snidely <snide...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Sunday, Athel Cornish-Bowden pointed out that ...
>>>>> On 2015-12-27 16:27:40 +0000, Lewis said:
>>>
>>>>>> No. For many people first cousins are considered too close,
>>>>>
>>>>> Not if you've been brought up in the bosom of the Church of England they
>>>>> aren't. Charles Darwin's wife Emma was his first cousin.
>>>
>>>> Which appears to have contributed to their offspring's ill health. "Of
>>>> the ten Darwin children, most were sickly. Three proved infertile as
>>>> adults, and three died young, roughly double the child mortality rate
>>>> in England." Kean, _The Violinist's Thumb_, pg 251
>>>
>>> Correlation is not causation.
>
>> And indeed, Kean admits that in the absence of DNA samples from Charles,
>> it is unlikely that any particular causation can be determined,
>> and that inbreeding may be a red herring. But correlation can be
>> an indication of where to look, and will remain so for the Darwins.
>
> *Every* family tree will have first cousin marriages. Mostly before 1870
> or so, but they are all there. Claiming that the first cousin was the
> cause of the Darwin's issues with their children without any evidence at
> all beyond "first cousins married? ooo, ick" is irresponsible.
me) being one of my great-great-great-great-grandfathers, who married
(not as his first wife, my great-great-great-great-grandmother) a first
cousin, in 1784. They had three sons, all apparently healthy.
When I was young it never occurred to me that there was any objection
to marrying a cousin. My sisters: no, definitely not. But a cousin, why
not? If it was OK with the law and the Church, why should I argue?
--
athel
David Kleinecke
Dec 28, 2015, 5:25:42 PM12/28/15
to
sisters and their children married). Offspring normal and nobody expected
otherwise.
Jerry Friedman
Dec 28, 2015, 6:17:40 PM12/28/15
to
On Monday, December 28, 2015 at 4:41:50 PM UTC-5, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> On 2015-12-28 21:16:14 +0000, Lewis said:
...
> On 2015-12-28 21:16:14 +0000, Lewis said:
> > *Every* family tree will have first cousin marriages. Mostly before 1870
> > or so, but they are all there. Claiming that the first cousin was the
> > cause of the Darwin's issues with their children without any evidence at
> > all beyond "first cousins married? ooo, ick" is irresponsible.
>
> Yes. There are several examples I know of in my family, the closest (to
> me) being one of my great-great-great-great-grandfathers, who married
> (not as his first wife, my great-great-great-great-grandmother) a first
> cousin, in 1784. They had three sons, all apparently healthy.
>
> When I was young it never occurred to me that there was any objection
> to marrying a cousin. My sisters: no, definitely not. But a cousin, why
> not? If it was OK with the law and the Church, why should I argue?
5% versus 3%. (I didn't look at the references.)
--
Jerry Friedman
Mark Brader
Dec 28, 2015, 7:09:38 PM12/28/15
to
Mark Brader:
> > ... do you know when they changed the name?
Cheryl Perkins:
--
Mark Brader | "...people continue to wish that C were something it is not,
Toronto | not realizing that if C were what they thought they wanted
m...@vex.net | it to be, it would never have succeeded and they wouldn't
| be using it in the first place." -- Steve Summit
> > ... do you know when they changed the name?
Cheryl Perkins:
> I had to look it up - 1955.
Thanks.
--
Mark Brader | "...people continue to wish that C were something it is not,
Toronto | not realizing that if C were what they thought they wanted
m...@vex.net | it to be, it would never have succeeded and they wouldn't
| be using it in the first place." -- Steve Summit
snide...@gmail.com
Dec 28, 2015, 10:14:33 PM12/28/15
to
On Monday, December 28, 2015 at 1:18:52 PM UTC-8, Lewis wrote:
> In message <d1be828b-79c7-483e...@googlegroups.com>
> snide...@gmail.com <snide...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Monday, December 28, 2015 at 11:45:30 AM UTC-8, Lewis wrote:
> >> In message <mn.dd897dfc4f7439a5.127094@snitoo>
> >> Snidely <snide...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > On Sunday, Athel Cornish-Bowden pointed out that ...
> >> >> On 2015-12-27 16:27:40 +0000, Lewis said:
> >>
> >> >>> No. For many people first cousins are considered too close,
> >> >>
> >> >> Not if you've been brought up in the bosom of the Church of England they
> >> >> aren't. Charles Darwin's wife Emma was his first cousin.
> >>
> >> > Which appears to have contributed to their offspring's ill health. "Of
> >> > the ten Darwin children, most were sickly. Three proved infertile as
> >> > adults, and three died young, roughly double the child mortality rate
> >> > in England." Kean, _The Violinist's Thumb_, pg 251
> >>
> >> Correlation is not causation.
>
> > And indeed, Kean admits that in the absence of DNA samples from Charles,
> > it is unlikely that any particular causation can be determined,
> > and that inbreeding may be a red herring. But correlation can be
> > an indication of where to look, and will remain so for the Darwins.
>
> *Every* family tree will have first cousin marriages. Mostly before 1870
> or so, but they are all there.
Likely before 1800 for my lines, and probably not in consecutive generations.
> In message <d1be828b-79c7-483e...@googlegroups.com>
> snide...@gmail.com <snide...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Monday, December 28, 2015 at 11:45:30 AM UTC-8, Lewis wrote:
> >> In message <mn.dd897dfc4f7439a5.127094@snitoo>
> >> Snidely <snide...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > On Sunday, Athel Cornish-Bowden pointed out that ...
> >> >> On 2015-12-27 16:27:40 +0000, Lewis said:
> >>
> >> >>> No. For many people first cousins are considered too close,
> >> >>
> >> >> Not if you've been brought up in the bosom of the Church of England they
> >> >> aren't. Charles Darwin's wife Emma was his first cousin.
> >>
> >> > Which appears to have contributed to their offspring's ill health. "Of
> >> > the ten Darwin children, most were sickly. Three proved infertile as
> >> > adults, and three died young, roughly double the child mortality rate
> >> > in England." Kean, _The Violinist's Thumb_, pg 251
> >>
> >> Correlation is not causation.
>
> > And indeed, Kean admits that in the absence of DNA samples from Charles,
> > it is unlikely that any particular causation can be determined,
> > and that inbreeding may be a red herring. But correlation can be
> > an indication of where to look, and will remain so for the Darwins.
>
> *Every* family tree will have first cousin marriages. Mostly before 1870
> or so, but they are all there.
> Claiming that the first cousin was the
> cause of the Darwin's issues with their children without any evidence at
> all beyond "first cousins married? ooo, ick" is irresponsible.
And Charles' ills could have psychosomatic, as the Freudians claimed.
We do know that the Water Cure didn't work out very well.
But the speculation is going to happen,
And we know that some families have a disproportionate share of birth defects.
/dps
Peter Moylan
Dec 28, 2015, 10:30:22 PM12/28/15
to
On 2015-Dec-27 01:53, Lewis wrote:
>>>> [ ••• ]
In another thread I mentioned that, although my newsreader has Unicode
support, there are some Unicode characters that it can't display. This
was in the context of a discussion over whether we should abandon ASCII
IPA and switch to true IPA.
Here is an excellent example of what happens at my end. My software has
no graphic to display U+0095 "message waiting". I don't know what the
rest of you are seeing here, but I'm seeing just a square with the
digits "0095" inside it.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
>>>> [ ••• ]
In another thread I mentioned that, although my newsreader has Unicode
support, there are some Unicode characters that it can't display. This
was in the context of a discussion over whether we should abandon ASCII
IPA and switch to true IPA.
Here is an excellent example of what happens at my end. My software has
no graphic to display U+0095 "message waiting". I don't know what the
rest of you are seeing here, but I'm seeing just a square with the
digits "0095" inside it.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Peter Moylan
Dec 28, 2015, 10:49:06 PM12/28/15
to
On 2015-Dec-28 03:27, Lewis wrote:
> There was an episode of 30 Rock where two characters who'd been having
> sex were disgusted, shocked, and horrified to discover they were
> something like 5th cousins.
>
> Yes, I know.
As an adolescent I was attracted to one of my second cousins, but I had
a strong sense that she was taboo in the same way that a sister would be
taboo.
Third cousins, on the other hand ... that translates to "practically
unrelated".
> There was an episode of 30 Rock where two characters who'd been having
> sex were disgusted, shocked, and horrified to discover they were
> something like 5th cousins.
>
> Yes, I know.
As an adolescent I was attracted to one of my second cousins, but I had
a strong sense that she was taboo in the same way that a sister would be
taboo.
Third cousins, on the other hand ... that translates to "practically
unrelated".
Peter Moylan
Dec 28, 2015, 10:52:12 PM12/28/15
to
On 2015-Dec-28 22:45, Peter Duncanson [BrE] wrote:
> It's a miracle that humans exist considering that our shared ancestor,
> Adam, produced children with Eve who wasn't a cousin or sister but was
> made from his own body. He reproduced using a separated part of himself,
> allegedly.
>
> That's extreme consanguinity.
Nah, that's just a sophisticated form of masturbation.
> It's a miracle that humans exist considering that our shared ancestor,
> Adam, produced children with Eve who wasn't a cousin or sister but was
> made from his own body. He reproduced using a separated part of himself,
> allegedly.
>
> That's extreme consanguinity.
Steve Hayes
Dec 28, 2015, 11:10:11 PM12/28/15
to
come to mind.
One of my favourite films was "Morgan, a suitable case for treatment".
It was made in the 1960s, and is about a bloke from a working-class
London family who tries to win back his rich estranged wife. He lives
with his mother in a small flat, all over nostalgic socialist posters.
She is sad and somewhat resigned to the difficulties of life.
One evening in Florence, being at a loose end, I went to see it again.
It had been dubbed into Italian, which changed that characters
completely. The mother had turned into a strident termagant, with the
son tied to her apron strings. At least that's what it sounded like to
me, simply from the change in the tone of the voices.
Peter Moylan
Dec 28, 2015, 11:14:10 PM12/28/15
to
On 2015-Dec-28 12:22, Steve Hayes wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Dec 2015 10:54:13 -0500, "Joe Roberts"
> <shoreh...@att.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> "CDB" <belle...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:n5or69$4ss$1...@speranza.aioe.org...
> On Sun, 27 Dec 2015 10:54:13 -0500, "Joe Roberts"
> <shoreh...@att.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> "CDB" <belle...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:n5or69$4ss$1...@speranza.aioe.org...
>>> Are female children ever said to follow after their mothers, using any
>>> similar expression?
>>
>> A similar one is for a daughter who comes along into life on her mother's
>> "apron strings".
>>
>> ... Er, there's a bit of sexism in that ... now it might be becoming
>> socially incorrect.
>
> I've usually heard that applied to males -- "He's tied to his mother's
> apron strings".
That's nothing to do with similarity of appearance or character, though.
>>> similar expression?
>>
>> A similar one is for a daughter who comes along into life on her mother's
>> "apron strings".
>>
>> ... Er, there's a bit of sexism in that ... now it might be becoming
>> socially incorrect.
>
> I've usually heard that applied to males -- "He's tied to his mother's
> apron strings".
The mother probably uses a different apron for that.
Did the TV series "Mother and Son" ever make it out of this country? If
you can find it, watch it, because it's both funny and sad. The
principal male character can never hang on to a girlfriend because of
interference by his demanding and slightly demented mother.
Peter T. Daniels
Dec 28, 2015, 11:28:49 PM12/28/15
to
On Monday, December 28, 2015 at 10:30:22 PM UTC-5, Peter Moylan wrote:
> On 2015-Dec-27 01:53, Lewis wrote:
>
> >>>> [ *** ]
> On 2015-Dec-27 01:53, Lewis wrote:
>
>
> In another thread I mentioned that, although my newsreader has Unicode
> support, there are some Unicode characters that it can't display. This
> was in the context of a discussion over whether we should abandon ASCII
> IPA and switch to true IPA.
>
> Here is an excellent example of what happens at my end. My software has
> no graphic to display U+0095 "message waiting". I don't know what the
> rest of you are seeing here, but I'm seeing just a square with the
> digits "0095" inside it.
There is in fact no character at 0095 (dec 0149); it is a control character
> In another thread I mentioned that, although my newsreader has Unicode
> support, there are some Unicode characters that it can't display. This
> was in the context of a discussion over whether we should abandon ASCII
> IPA and switch to true IPA.
>
> Here is an excellent example of what happens at my end. My software has
> no graphic to display U+0095 "message waiting". I don't know what the
> rest of you are seeing here, but I'm seeing just a square with the
> digits "0095" inside it.
with the content "message waiting," so it's probably left over from the
teletype or wherever "upper ASCII" was inherited from, and should not have
appeared within a message at all.
If you typed an 0095 character somewhere in your paragraph, there's no visible
trace of it.
RH Draney
Dec 29, 2015, 12:52:59 AM12/29/15
to
On 12/28/2015 9:09 PM, Steve Hayes wrote:
>
> One of my favourite films was "Morgan, a suitable case for treatment".
> It was made in the 1960s, and is about a bloke from a working-class
> London family who tries to win back his rich estranged wife. He lives
> with his mother in a small flat, all over nostalgic socialist posters.
> She is sad and somewhat resigned to the difficulties of life.
>
> One evening in Florence, being at a loose end, I went to see it again.
> It had been dubbed into Italian, which changed that characters
> completely. The mother had turned into a strident termagant, with the
> son tied to her apron strings. At least that's what it sounded like to
> me, simply from the change in the tone of the voices.
I had a similar experience with "Crouching Tiger, Hidden
>
> One of my favourite films was "Morgan, a suitable case for treatment".
> It was made in the 1960s, and is about a bloke from a working-class
> London family who tries to win back his rich estranged wife. He lives
> with his mother in a small flat, all over nostalgic socialist posters.
> She is sad and somewhat resigned to the difficulties of life.
>
> One evening in Florence, being at a loose end, I went to see it again.
> It had been dubbed into Italian, which changed that characters
> completely. The mother had turned into a strident termagant, with the
> son tied to her apron strings. At least that's what it sounded like to
> me, simply from the change in the tone of the voices.
Dragon"...having first seen it in Mandarin with English subtitles, I was
shocked when I heard the voice they used to dub Michelle Yeoh's
character...instead of the slightly world-weary tone I had heard in the
theater, she came off as a nagging fishwife....r
David Kleinecke
Dec 29, 2015, 1:17:14 AM12/29/15
to
On Monday, December 28, 2015 at 7:30:22 PM UTC-8, Peter Moylan wrote:
> On 2015-Dec-27 01:53, Lewis wrote:
>
> >>>> [ *** ]
> On 2015-Dec-27 01:53, Lewis wrote:
>
>
> In another thread I mentioned that, although my newsreader has Unicode
> support, there are some Unicode characters that it can't display. This
> was in the context of a discussion over whether we should abandon ASCII
> IPA and switch to true IPA.
>
> Here is an excellent example of what happens at my end. My software has
> no graphic to display U+0095 "message waiting". I don't know what the
> rest of you are seeing here, but I'm seeing just a square with the
> digits "0095" inside it.
The Unicode standard says it should be a dotted square with the letters
> In another thread I mentioned that, although my newsreader has Unicode
> support, there are some Unicode characters that it can't display. This
> was in the context of a discussion over whether we should abandon ASCII
> IPA and switch to true IPA.
>
> Here is an excellent example of what happens at my end. My software has
> no graphic to display U+0095 "message waiting". I don't know what the
> rest of you are seeing here, but I'm seeing just a square with the
> digits "0095" inside it.
MW inside. My character map doesn't show anything but the no-such-glyph
(the square with 0095 in it).
Athel Cornish-Bowden
Dec 29, 2015, 2:13:12 AM12/29/15
to
Darwin-Wedgwood-Galton marriages.
--
athel
Richard Tobin
Dec 29, 2015, 6:25:05 AM12/29/15
to
In article <n5suje$hbi$1...@dont-email.me>,
Tony's reply was marked as Latin-1, which doesn't have a bullet
character, but it was in fact encoded in a Microsoft superset of
Latin-1 (probably cp1252) which has a bullet with code 0x95.
Because Tony's article was marked as Latin-1, Lewis's reply to that
(in UTF-8) had the character which is 0x95 in Latin-1, which is the
C1 control character Message Waiting.
This is a typical Microsoft bug.
-- Richard
Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
>On 2015-Dec-27 01:53, Lewis wrote:
>Here is an excellent example of what happens at my end. My software has
>no graphic to display U+0095 "message waiting". I don't know what the
>rest of you are seeing here, but I'm seeing just a square with the
>digits "0095" inside it.
Athel posted an article in UTF-8 containing three bullet characters.
>On 2015-Dec-27 01:53, Lewis wrote:
>Here is an excellent example of what happens at my end. My software has
>no graphic to display U+0095 "message waiting". I don't know what the
>rest of you are seeing here, but I'm seeing just a square with the
>digits "0095" inside it.
Tony's reply was marked as Latin-1, which doesn't have a bullet
character, but it was in fact encoded in a Microsoft superset of
Latin-1 (probably cp1252) which has a bullet with code 0x95.
Because Tony's article was marked as Latin-1, Lewis's reply to that
(in UTF-8) had the character which is 0x95 in Latin-1, which is the
C1 control character Message Waiting.
This is a typical Microsoft bug.
-- Richard
Athel Cornish-Bowden
Dec 29, 2015, 6:35:58 AM12/29/15
to
On 2015-12-29 11:24:05 +0000, Richard Tobin said:
> In article <n5suje$hbi$1...@dont-email.me>,
> Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2015-Dec-27 01:53, Lewis wrote:
>
>> Here is an excellent example of what happens at my end. My software has
>> no graphic to display U+0095 "message waiting". I don't know what the
>> rest of you are seeing here, but I'm seeing just a square with the
>> digits "0095" inside it.
>
> Athel posted an article in UTF-8 containing three bullet characters.
It was intended to be [ … ], but I kept the alt-shift keys needed for [
> In article <n5suje$hbi$1...@dont-email.me>,
> Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2015-Dec-27 01:53, Lewis wrote:
>
>> Here is an excellent example of what happens at my end. My software has
>> no graphic to display U+0095 "message waiting". I don't know what the
>> rest of you are seeing here, but I'm seeing just a square with the
>> digits "0095" inside it.
>
> Athel posted an article in UTF-8 containing three bullet characters.
] pressed for the other characters and got [ ••• ]. I noticed, but
didn't correct it as I didn't think it would matter. Apparently it did.
>
> Tony's reply was marked as Latin-1, which doesn't have a bullet
> character, but it was in fact encoded in a Microsoft superset of
> Latin-1 (probably cp1252) which has a bullet with code 0x95.
>
> Because Tony's article was marked as Latin-1, Lewis's reply to that
> (in UTF-8) had the character which is 0x95 in Latin-1, which is the
> C1 control character Message Waiting.
>
> This is a typical Microsoft bug.
>
> -- Richard
--
> Tony's reply was marked as Latin-1, which doesn't have a bullet
> character, but it was in fact encoded in a Microsoft superset of
> Latin-1 (probably cp1252) which has a bullet with code 0x95.
>
> Because Tony's article was marked as Latin-1, Lewis's reply to that
> (in UTF-8) had the character which is 0x95 in Latin-1, which is the
> C1 control character Message Waiting.
>
> This is a typical Microsoft bug.
>
> -- Richard
athel
Richard Tobin
Dec 29, 2015, 6:55:04 AM12/29/15
to
In article <def9go...@mid.individual.net>,
Athel Cornish-Bowden <acor...@imm.cnrs.fr> wrote:
>It was intended to be [ <ellipsis character> ], but I kept the
Latin-1 character but is in cp1252. The bug is in Tony's software,
not yours.
-- Richard
Athel Cornish-Bowden <acor...@imm.cnrs.fr> wrote:
>It was intended to be [ <ellipsis character> ], but I kept the
>alt-shift keys needed for [ ] pressed for the other characters and
>got [ <3 bullet points> ]. I noticed, but didn't correct it as I
>didn't think it would matter. Apparently it did.
It would have had the same problem, as the ellipsis is also not a
Latin-1 character but is in cp1252. The bug is in Tony's software,
not yours.
-- Richard
Peter T. Daniels
Dec 29, 2015, 9:28:34 AM12/29/15
to
On Tuesday, December 29, 2015 at 6:25:05 AM UTC-5, Richard Tobin wrote:
> In article <n5suje$hbi$1...@dont-email.me>,
> Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
> >On 2015-Dec-27 01:53, Lewis wrote:
>
> >Here is an excellent example of what happens at my end. My software has
> >no graphic to display U+0095 "message waiting". I don't know what the
> >rest of you are seeing here, but I'm seeing just a square with the
> >digits "0095" inside it.
>
> Athel posted an article in UTF-8 containing three bullet characters.
>
> Tony's reply was marked as Latin-1, which doesn't have a bullet
> character, but it was in fact encoded in a Microsoft superset of
> Latin-1 (probably cp1252) which has a bullet with code 0x95.
? There's been no Tony posting in this thread since Saturday, well before
> In article <n5suje$hbi$1...@dont-email.me>,
> Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
> >On 2015-Dec-27 01:53, Lewis wrote:
>
> >Here is an excellent example of what happens at my end. My software has
> >no graphic to display U+0095 "message waiting". I don't know what the
> >rest of you are seeing here, but I'm seeing just a square with the
> >digits "0095" inside it.
>
> Athel posted an article in UTF-8 containing three bullet characters.
>
> Tony's reply was marked as Latin-1, which doesn't have a bullet
> character, but it was in fact encoded in a Microsoft superset of
> Latin-1 (probably cp1252) which has a bullet with code 0x95.
this question came up.
> Because Tony's article was marked as Latin-1, Lewis's reply to that
> (in UTF-8) had the character which is 0x95 in Latin-1, which is the
> C1 control character Message Waiting.
>
> This is a typical Microsoft bug.
Richard Tobin
Dec 29, 2015, 10:00:04 AM12/29/15
to
In article <e61a71a7-3dc2-44ef...@googlegroups.com>,
>> This is a typical Microsoft bug.
>In what way? "Microsoft" doesn't impose "Latin-1" on my UTF-8.
It's typical of Microsoft systems to produce documents in their
proprietary encodings that are marked as ISO Latin. A few weeks ago I
even found cp1252 quotation marks in a MARC-8 record.
And it's typical of Microsoft systems to *display* the incorrectly
labelled text as if it were labelled cp1252, so that it appears
correct to the author, and the error is only apparent to other
readers.
-- Richard
Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> Athel posted an article in UTF-8 containing three bullet characters.
>>
>> Tony's reply was marked as Latin-1, which doesn't have a bullet
>> character, but it was in fact encoded in a Microsoft superset of
>> Latin-1 (probably cp1252) which has a bullet with code 0x95.
>? There's been no Tony posting in this thread since Saturday, well before
>this question came up.
Yes, it was Tony's reply on Saturday that introduced the error.
>> Athel posted an article in UTF-8 containing three bullet characters.
>>
>> Tony's reply was marked as Latin-1, which doesn't have a bullet
>> character, but it was in fact encoded in a Microsoft superset of
>> Latin-1 (probably cp1252) which has a bullet with code 0x95.
>? There's been no Tony posting in this thread since Saturday, well before
>this question came up.
>> This is a typical Microsoft bug.
>In what way? "Microsoft" doesn't impose "Latin-1" on my UTF-8.
proprietary encodings that are marked as ISO Latin. A few weeks ago I
even found cp1252 quotation marks in a MARC-8 record.
And it's typical of Microsoft systems to *display* the incorrectly
labelled text as if it were labelled cp1252, so that it appears
correct to the author, and the error is only apparent to other
readers.
-- Richard
Peter T. Daniels
Dec 29, 2015, 11:42:55 AM12/29/15
to
Someone else who quoted Tony's posting must have messed it up.
In fact they appear intact all the way through and including Peter M's posting
saying that he gets a control character instead, and David's and my quoting of
it; but then you broke the chain by deleting the line when you quoted me. So it
would seem to be Peter M's admittedly archaic and nonconformist computer that
has the problem.
Lewis
Dec 29, 2015, 11:53:00 AM12/29/15
to
In message <n5tqgl$3kr$1...@macpro.inf.ed.ac.uk>
Microsoft's handling of character sets is byzantine and fundamentally
broken. They have known this at least since Windows 95, but have made no
efforts to fix it. The fact that they are still using code pages, badly,
for UTF-8 is a cause of many encoding issues.
--
I'm just going to go home, lie down, and listen to country
music. The music of pain.
broken. They have known this at least since Windows 95, but have made no
efforts to fix it. The fact that they are still using code pages, badly,
for UTF-8 is a cause of many encoding issues.
--
I'm just going to go home, lie down, and listen to country
music. The music of pain.
Richard Tobin
Dec 29, 2015, 3:35:03 PM12/29/15
to
In article <ff435758-56cf-4f2d...@googlegroups.com>,
a link to your one?
>In fact they appear intact all the way through and including Peter
>M's posting saying that he gets a control character instead
There is no doubt that they are wrong in those messages - I have
inspected them on my server. One reason why they might appear to you
to be right is because of this:
>> And it's typical of Microsoft systems to *display* the incorrectly
>> labelled text as if it were labelled cp1252, so that it appears
>> correct to the author, and the error is only apparent to other
>> readers.
But in this case it seems that Google Groups is "fixing" the broken
characters in what it displays. (I can't actually be sure what it is
doing without a lot more work.) If you look at Peter Moylan's article
in Google Groups it shows 3 bullet points, but if you select "Show
original" from the menu they appear as blanks.
Out of interest, can you tell me what you see on this page:
http://www.cogsci.ed.ac.uk/~richard/unicode-controls.html
-- Richard
Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>I replied to Tony and the three bullet characters appear properly in my reply.
The only reply I see to Tony's message is Lewis's. Can you give me
>I replied to Tony and the three bullet characters appear properly in my reply.
a link to your one?
>In fact they appear intact all the way through and including Peter
>M's posting saying that he gets a control character instead
inspected them on my server. One reason why they might appear to you
to be right is because of this:
>> And it's typical of Microsoft systems to *display* the incorrectly
>> labelled text as if it were labelled cp1252, so that it appears
>> correct to the author, and the error is only apparent to other
>> readers.
characters in what it displays. (I can't actually be sure what it is
doing without a lot more work.) If you look at Peter Moylan's article
in Google Groups it shows 3 bullet points, but if you select "Show
original" from the menu they appear as blanks.
Out of interest, can you tell me what you see on this page:
http://www.cogsci.ed.ac.uk/~richard/unicode-controls.html
-- Richard
snide...@gmail.com
Dec 29, 2015, 3:38:44 PM12/29/15
to
On Tuesday, December 29, 2015 at 12:35:03 PM UTC-8, Richard Tobin wrote:
> Out of interest, can you tell me what you see on this page:
>
> http://www.cogsci.ed.ac.uk/~richard/unicode-controls.html
Blank for me, GG on Firefox on Fedora 16 (antique!)
> Out of interest, can you tell me what you see on this page:
>
> http://www.cogsci.ed.ac.uk/~richard/unicode-controls.html
/dps
Peter T. Daniels
Dec 29, 2015, 5:30:06 PM12/29/15
to
On Tuesday, December 29, 2015 at 3:35:03 PM UTC-5, Richard Tobin wrote:
> In article <ff435758-56cf-4f2d...@googlegroups.com>,
> Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> >I replied to Tony and the three bullet characters appear properly in my reply.
>
> The only reply I see to Tony's message is Lewis's. Can you give me
> a link to your one?
I'm not going to try to look up how to do that. It's the one chronologically
> In article <ff435758-56cf-4f2d...@googlegroups.com>,
> Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> >I replied to Tony and the three bullet characters appear properly in my reply.
>
> The only reply I see to Tony's message is Lewis's. Can you give me
> a link to your one?
immediately after it.
> >In fact they appear intact all the way through and including Peter
> >M's posting saying that he gets a control character instead
>
> There is no doubt that they are wrong in those messages - I have
> inspected them on my server. One reason why they might appear to you
> to be right is because of this:
>
> >> And it's typical of Microsoft systems to *display* the incorrectly
> >> labelled text as if it were labelled cp1252, so that it appears
> >> correct to the author, and the error is only apparent to other
> >> readers.
>
> But in this case it seems that Google Groups is "fixing" the broken
> characters in what it displays. (I can't actually be sure what it is
> doing without a lot more work.) If you look at Peter Moylan's article
> in Google Groups it shows 3 bullet points, but if you select "Show
> original" from the menu they appear as blanks.
No idea what "cp1252" is, nor does it matter to me.
> Out of interest, can you tell me what you see on this page:
>
> http://www.cogsci.ed.ac.uk/~richard/unicode-controls.html
then a comment that if I see nothingness, then all is copasetic..
Richard Tobin
Dec 29, 2015, 5:40:03 PM12/29/15
to
In article <a34f2865-4093-49e9...@googlegroups.com>,
work for their users, and if that breaks it for other people that
doesn't matter - in fact it's good, because people like you will
believe that everything else is inferior.
Sooner or later Google will turn off Google Groups, just as they have
with so many other "products", and if everyone has switched to them
it will be the end of usenet.
-- Richard
Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> But in this case it seems that Google Groups is "fixing" the broken
>> characters in what it displays. (I can't actually be sure what it is
>> doing without a lot more work.) If you look at Peter Moylan's article
>> in Google Groups it shows 3 bullet points, but if you select "Show
>> original" from the menu they appear as blanks.
>So it's yet another way GG is superior to whatever you use.
The trouble with both Microsoft and Google is that they want things to
>> But in this case it seems that Google Groups is "fixing" the broken
>> characters in what it displays. (I can't actually be sure what it is
>> doing without a lot more work.) If you look at Peter Moylan's article
>> in Google Groups it shows 3 bullet points, but if you select "Show
>> original" from the menu they appear as blanks.
>So it's yet another way GG is superior to whatever you use.
work for their users, and if that breaks it for other people that
doesn't matter - in fact it's good, because people like you will
believe that everything else is inferior.
Sooner or later Google will turn off Google Groups, just as they have
with so many other "products", and if everyone has switched to them
it will be the end of usenet.
-- Richard
snide...@gmail.com
Dec 29, 2015, 5:41:15 PM12/29/15
to
On Tuesday, December 29, 2015 at 2:30:06 PM UTC-8, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 29, 2015 at 3:35:03 PM UTC-5, Richard Tobin wrote:
> > The only reply I see to Tony's message is Lewis's. Can you give me
> > a link to your one?
>
> I'm not going to try to look up how to do that. It's the one chronologically
> immediately after it.
Look up how to do that? Look up how to do that?
> On Tuesday, December 29, 2015 at 3:35:03 PM UTC-5, Richard Tobin wrote:
> > The only reply I see to Tony's message is Lewis's. Can you give me
> > a link to your one?
>
> I'm not going to try to look up how to do that. It's the one chronologically
> immediately after it.
You know how to reply to a message, correct?
The twirly arrow icon for reply has a tic mark next to it.
Hover over it, and the tooltip says "More message actions".
Click on it, and you get several choices,
including "link". Click on that.
Copy the funny URL it pops up.
Paste in your reply.
>
> > >In fact they appear intact all the way through and including Peter
> > >M's posting saying that he gets a control character instead
> >
> > There is no doubt that they are wrong in those messages - I have
> > inspected them on my server. One reason why they might appear to you
> > to be right is because of this:
> >
> > >> And it's typical of Microsoft systems to *display* the incorrectly
> > >> labelled text as if it were labelled cp1252, so that it appears
> > >> correct to the author, and the error is only apparent to other
> > >> readers.
> >
> > But in this case it seems that Google Groups is "fixing" the broken
> > characters in what it displays. (I can't actually be sure what it is
> > doing without a lot more work.) If you look at Peter Moylan's article
> > in Google Groups it shows 3 bullet points, but if you select "Show
> > original" from the menu they appear as blanks.
>
> So it's yet another way GG is superior to whatever you use.
or is even appropriate.
>
> No idea what "cp1252" is, nor does it matter to me.
("Code Page #1252", used in DOS before UNICODE was adopted,
and still crufting up a bunch of stuff in the Windows environment.)
(And just to add to the fun, MS apparently thinks UTF-16 is the correct way
to do UNICODE, which would be fine if anybody used it.
The rest of the world uses UTF-8,
and there's a whole lot of translation going on across the barricades.)
/dps
Richard Tobin
Dec 29, 2015, 6:15:04 PM12/29/15
to
In article <a34f2865-4093-49e9...@googlegroups.com>,
>It's the one chronologically immediately after it.
No, that's a reply by you to Athel's article.
And in it the bullet points have been changed to asterisks!
-- Richard
Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> The only reply I see to Tony's message is Lewis's. Can you give me
>> a link to your one?
>I'm not going to try to look up how to do that.
I would have thought that Google Groups would make it trivial.
>> The only reply I see to Tony's message is Lewis's. Can you give me
>> a link to your one?
>I'm not going to try to look up how to do that.
>It's the one chronologically immediately after it.
And in it the bullet points have been changed to asterisks!
-- Richard
Peter Moylan
Dec 29, 2015, 7:47:56 PM12/29/15
to
On 2015-Dec-30 09:30, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 29, 2015 at 3:35:03 PM UTC-5, Richard Tobin wrote:
>> In article <ff435758-56cf-4f2d...@googlegroups.com>,
>> Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>
>>> I replied to Tony and the three bullet characters appear properly in my reply.
>>
>> The only reply I see to Tony's message is Lewis's. Can you give me
>> a link to your one?
>
> I'm not going to try to look up how to do that. It's the one chronologically
> immediately after it.
Lewis responded to Tony. I (and a couple of other people) responded to
> On Tuesday, December 29, 2015 at 3:35:03 PM UTC-5, Richard Tobin wrote:
>> In article <ff435758-56cf-4f2d...@googlegroups.com>,
>> Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>
>>> I replied to Tony and the three bullet characters appear properly in my reply.
>>
>> The only reply I see to Tony's message is Lewis's. Can you give me
>> a link to your one?
>
> I'm not going to try to look up how to do that. It's the one chronologically
> immediately after it.
Lewis's message. You responded to mine.
"Chronologically immediately after it" means nothing to those of us
whose newsreaders do correct threading. You are being fooled by the fact
that Google Groups does not clearly display the threading.
snide...@gmail.com
Dec 29, 2015, 8:26:54 PM12/29/15
to
Topic options (a tic mark underneath the thread title) -> Tree View.
/dps
Will Parsons
Dec 29, 2015, 9:03:47 PM12/29/15
to
correct. You did not reply directly to Tony - only Lewis did. I also
examined the messages, and was actually in the process of writing a
response along the lines of Richard's, when I noticed he'd beaten me
to it. In essence, Athel wrote a message that contained a series of
three "bullets" (i.e., Unicode 2022). These became deformed in Tony's
reply as 0x95, Windows charset 1252. The *only* reply to Tony's post
was by Lewis, in which the charset shifted back to UTF-8, and the
character in question became Unicode 0095, "message waiting".
In addition to the sequence, I have to agree with Richard that this is
(one more) example of Microsoft screwing up.
--
Will
Peter T. Daniels
Dec 29, 2015, 11:19:46 PM12/29/15
to
it was set out-of-the-box.
Peter T. Daniels
Dec 29, 2015, 11:23:27 PM12/29/15
to
what he responds to. I see that my response to Athel looks like it has the
bullets but if one puts one's nose against the screen, one sees they are
actually asterisks. So it was sort of nice of whichever system was responsible
to change characters that some systems find unreadable into very similar
characters that all systems can read.
> In addition to the sequence, I have to agree with Richard that this is
> (one more) example of Microsoft screwing up.
Athel Cornish-Bowden
Dec 31, 2015, 12:10:29 PM12/31/15
to
On 2015-12-29 11:51:24 +0000, Richard Tobin said:
> In article <def9go...@mid.individual.net>,
> Athel Cornish-Bowden <acor...@imm.cnrs.fr> wrote:
>
>> It was intended to be [ <ellipsis character> ], but I kept the
>> alt-shift keys needed for [ ] pressed for the other characters and
>> got [ <3 bullet points> ]. I noticed, but didn't correct it as I
>> didn't think it would matter. Apparently it did.
>
> It would have had the same problem, as the ellipsis is also not a
> Latin-1 character but is in cp1252.
I don't usually use the ellipsis character (…) in Usenet posts or email
> In article <def9go...@mid.individual.net>,
> Athel Cornish-Bowden <acor...@imm.cnrs.fr> wrote:
>
>> It was intended to be [ <ellipsis character> ], but I kept the
>> alt-shift keys needed for [ ] pressed for the other characters and
>> got [ <3 bullet points> ]. I noticed, but didn't correct it as I
>> didn't think it would matter. Apparently it did.
>
> It would have had the same problem, as the ellipsis is also not a
> Latin-1 character but is in cp1252.
messages, as I know it can be misunderstood by some software, so I type
three full stops (…) instead. I do use the proper character in more
formal writing, however.
Stimulated by your comment I searched and found the package described
at
http://ftp.oleane.net/pub/CTAN/macros/latex/contrib/frankenstein/lips.pdf,
which I didn't previously know of. I agree with the author's criticisms
of the \dots command (in text), but as I didn't know about the lips
package before I've been using do-it-yourself commands:
\DeclareTextCommandDefault{\fourdots}{%
.\hspace*{0.02cm}.\hspace*{0.02cm}.\hspace*{0.02cm}.
}
\DeclareTextCommandDefault{\threedots}{%
.\hspace*{0.02cm}.\hspace*{0.02cm}.\hspace*{-0.01cm}
}
These have the advantage of putting the dots as close to one another as
I want them (closer than the author of the lips package puts them), but
could be seen as a bit clunky.
> The bug is in Tony's software,
> not yours.
>
> -- Richard
athel
Athel Cornish-Bowden
Dec 31, 2015, 12:15:11 PM12/31/15
to
On 2015-12-29 20:33:08 +0000, Richard Tobin said:
> [ … ]
have in my computer -- Firefox, Safari, Chrome and iCab.
--
athel
> [ … ]
>
> Out of interest, can you tell me what you see on this page:
>
> http://www.cogsci.ed.ac.uk/~richard/unicode-controls.html
Thet come out blank (as you say they should) with the four browsers I
> Out of interest, can you tell me what you see on this page:
>
> http://www.cogsci.ed.ac.uk/~richard/unicode-controls.html
have in my computer -- Firefox, Safari, Chrome and iCab.
--
athel
Athel Cornish-Bowden
Dec 31, 2015, 12:24:06 PM12/31/15
to
On 2015-12-30 02:03:43 +0000, Will Parsons said:
> { … ]
> In addition to the sequence, I have to agree with Richard that this is
> (one more) example of Microsoft screwing up.
Yes, and the reason why it matters is the one Richard gave, that
eventually Google will want to play at something else and will drop the
whole of Google Groups (remember what happened to Google Reader: one
day it was there, then it wasn't), and leave all the people who depend
on it completely lost.
I have the impression (not confirmed in any serious way) that most of
the Usenet groups that are still in good health are mainly inhabited by
people who use real news readers, so they will be much less affected
than other groups. That might even be a good thing.
--
athel
> { … ]
> In addition to the sequence, I have to agree with Richard that this is
> (one more) example of Microsoft screwing up.
eventually Google will want to play at something else and will drop the
whole of Google Groups (remember what happened to Google Reader: one
day it was there, then it wasn't), and leave all the people who depend
on it completely lost.
I have the impression (not confirmed in any serious way) that most of
the Usenet groups that are still in good health are mainly inhabited by
people who use real news readers, so they will be much less affected
than other groups. That might even be a good thing.
--
athel
David Kleinecke
Dec 31, 2015, 1:12:56 PM12/31/15
to
On Thursday, December 31, 2015 at 9:24:06 AM UTC-8, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> On 2015-12-30 02:03:43 +0000, Will Parsons said:
>
> > { ... ]
> On 2015-12-30 02:03:43 +0000, Will Parsons said:
>
because their ISP doesn't do Usenet. GG dropping Usenet - which I don't
expect in my life time - would be no different than having your ISP drop
Usenet.
At least that's how it looks to me. There is a rather high probability
I am wrong.
PS: Per Wikipedia traffic on Usenet is still increasing.
Peter T. Daniels
Dec 31, 2015, 2:23:33 PM12/31/15
to
On Thursday, December 31, 2015 at 12:10:29 PM UTC-5, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> On 2015-12-29 11:51:24 +0000, Richard Tobin said:
> > In article <def9go...@mid.individual.net>,
> > Athel Cornish-Bowden <acor...@imm.cnrs.fr> wrote:
> >> It was intended to be [ <ellipsis character> ], but I kept the
> >> alt-shift keys needed for [ ] pressed for the other characters and
> >> got [ <3 bullet points> ]. I noticed, but didn't correct it as I
> >> didn't think it would matter. Apparently it did.
> > It would have had the same problem, as the ellipsis is also not a
> > Latin-1 character but is in cp1252.
>
> I don't usually use the ellipsis character (...) in Usenet posts or email
> On 2015-12-29 11:51:24 +0000, Richard Tobin said:
> > In article <def9go...@mid.individual.net>,
> > Athel Cornish-Bowden <acor...@imm.cnrs.fr> wrote:
> >> It was intended to be [ <ellipsis character> ], but I kept the
> >> alt-shift keys needed for [ ] pressed for the other characters and
> >> got [ <3 bullet points> ]. I noticed, but didn't correct it as I
> >> didn't think it would matter. Apparently it did.
> > It would have had the same problem, as the ellipsis is also not a
> > Latin-1 character but is in cp1252.
>
> messages, as I know it can be misunderstood by some software, so I type
> three full stops (...) instead. I do use the proper character in more
> formal writing, however.
>
> Stimulated by your comment I searched and found the package described
> at
> http://ftp.oleane.net/pub/CTAN/macros/latex/contrib/frankenstein/lips.pdf,
> which I didn't previously know of. I agree with the author's criticisms
> of the \dots command (in text), but as I didn't know about the lips
> package before I've been using do-it-yourself commands:
>
> \DeclareTextCommandDefault{\fourdots}{%
> .\hspace*{0.02cm}.\hspace*{0.02cm}.\hspace*{0.02cm}.
> }
>
> \DeclareTextCommandDefault{\threedots}{%
> .\hspace*{0.02cm}.\hspace*{0.02cm}.\hspace*{-0.01cm}
> }
>
> These have the advantage of putting the dots as close to one another as
> I want them (closer than the author of the lips package puts them), but
> could be seen as a bit clunky.
>
> > The bug is in Tony's software, not yours.
Unless you tell it not to in the AutoCorrect tool, MSWord automatically
>
> Stimulated by your comment I searched and found the package described
> at
> http://ftp.oleane.net/pub/CTAN/macros/latex/contrib/frankenstein/lips.pdf,
> which I didn't previously know of. I agree with the author's criticisms
> of the \dots command (in text), but as I didn't know about the lips
> package before I've been using do-it-yourself commands:
>
> \DeclareTextCommandDefault{\fourdots}{%
> .\hspace*{0.02cm}.\hspace*{0.02cm}.\hspace*{0.02cm}.
> }
>
> \DeclareTextCommandDefault{\threedots}{%
> .\hspace*{0.02cm}.\hspace*{0.02cm}.\hspace*{-0.01cm}
> }
>
> These have the advantage of putting the dots as close to one another as
> I want them (closer than the author of the lips package puts them), but
> could be seen as a bit clunky.
>
> > The bug is in Tony's software, not yours.
turns a sequence of three periods into the ellipsis character.
0 new messages