counterreaction?
Melissa
entry "counter-," but I'm still in doubt if I should use it...seems
like a hyphen would be better...counter-reaction.
Mike Lyle
So this is a counter to a reaction, like "counter-reformation" and
"counter-revolution"? I'd unhesitatingly hyphen it, without fear of any
convincing surrejoinder.
"I can't believe it's not surrebutter," said Tom non-unctuously.
--
Mike.
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
The OED has two quotes, one with a hyphen and one without.
Personally I prefer it with a hyphen. It is easier to read. It is not a
sufficiently familiar word for me to be able to recognise it without
thinking. Without the hyphen I needed to stop to consciously split it
into its two component parts.
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
jerry_f...@yahoo.com
I agree with Mike and Peter in preferring the hyphen, but if I were a
copyeditor, I'd never change anything that a dictionary approves.
--
Jerry Friedman
Melissa
>
> I agree with Mike and Peter in preferring the hyphen, but if I were a
> copyeditor, I'd never change anything that a dictionary approves.
>
> --
> Jerry Friedman
That I am...best follow the rules...but I agree that counterreaction
looks ridiculous.
Skitt
>> I agree with Mike and Peter in preferring the hyphen, but if I were a
>> copyeditor, I'd never change anything that a dictionary approves.
>
> That I am...best follow the rules...but I agree that counterreaction
> looks ridiculous.
What do you say about "counterrevolution"? Both M-W Online and AHD4 have it
as a single word. I don't see anything ridiculous about "counterreaction".
I can read well enough to handle long words. Of course, I grew up in
Germany.
--
Skitt (AmE)
R H Draney
Just to be on the safe side, put *both* hyphens back in: counter-re-action....r
--
"You got Schadenfreude on my Weltanschauung!"
"You got Weltanschauung in my Schadenfreude!"
Mark Brader
> > Is "counterreaction" a word? It's listed in Webster's 11th ...
Well, you've answered your own question.
> > seems like a hyphen would be better...counter-reaction.
Jerry Friedman:
> I agree with Mike and Peter in preferring the hyphen...
Well, what about Melissa? Why don't you agree with her too? :-)
Count me on the other side, but it's certainly a matter of opinion.
--
Mark Brader "'A matter of opinion'[?] I have to say you are
Toronto right. There['s] your opinion, which is wrong,
m...@vex.net and mine, which is right." -- Gene Ward Smith
Don Phillipson
news:890f4469-db4e-41e8...@u18g2000pro.googlegroups.com...
> Is "counterreaction" a word? It's listed in Webster's 11th under the
> entry "counter-," but I'm still in doubt if I should use it...seems
> like a hyphen would be better...counter-reaction.
Better words are available (from the sport of fencing,
traditionally labeled in French). An attack (by person A)
may be followed by a riposte = counterattack (by person B)
and then a remise (by person A again.)
No special word exists for any fourth action in this
sequence (as does occurs, but seldom.) But these terms
seem clear in a way "countner-reaction" is not.
--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)
tony cooper
<e9...@SPAMBLOCK.ncf.ca> wrote:
>"Melissa" <Meliss...@huntel.net> wrote in message
>news:890f4469-db4e-41e8...@u18g2000pro.googlegroups.com...
>
>> Is "counterreaction" a word? It's listed in Webster's 11th under the
>> entry "counter-," but I'm still in doubt if I should use it...seems
>> like a hyphen would be better...counter-reaction.
>
>Better words are available (from the sport of fencing,
>traditionally labeled in French). An attack (by person A)
>may be followed by a riposte = counterattack (by person B)
>and then a remise (by person A again.)
>
I've seen counter-reaction used in articles about the stock market. A
spate of selling in one area may spur a counter-reaction of buying in
another. I doubt if that would be described as a riposte.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
jerry_f...@yahoo.com
> "Melissa" <Melissa.L...@huntel.net> wrote in message
>
> news:890f4469-db4e-41e8...@u18g2000pro.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Is "counterreaction" a word? It's listed in Webster's 11th under the
> > entry "counter-," but I'm still in doubt if I should use it...seems
> > like a hyphen would be better...counter-reaction.
>
> Better words are available (from the sport of fencing,
> traditionally labeled in French). An attack (by person A)
> may be followed by a riposte = counterattack (by person B)
> and then a remise (by person A again.)
That appears to be a counter-riposte, not a remise. A remise is
"immediate replacement of an attack that missed or was parried,
without withdrawing the arm."
http://www.ii.uib.no/~arild/fencing/faq/asciifaq.03
"If the attack continues [after a parry] without any replacement of
the point and makes a touch, it retains the right-of-way ('mal-parry'
by the defender). If the attacker must replace the point into a
threatening line before continuing, it is a remise (renewal of the
attack) and does not have right-of-way over the riposte."
http://www.ii.uib.no/~arild/fencing/faq/asciifaq.03
See also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remise_(fencing)
When I used to watch fencing matches, in which the judge would explain
his decision of the judges (in saber) would confer, I think I heard a
lot more about parries and ripostes than anything else. The typical
sequence seemed to be
A: Attack
B: Parry, riposte
A: Parry, riposte (apparently officially a counter-riposte)
etc.
A less common sequence, I think, was
A: Attack
B: Parry (riposte late or lacking)
A: Remise
> No special word exists for any fourth action in this
> sequence (as does occurs, but seldom.) But these terms
> seem clear in a way "countner-reaction" is not.
On the contrary, the differences between "counter-riposte", "remise",
"redoublement", and "reprise" seem to be quite technical, and I doubt
most people would recognize any of them, whereas "counter-reaction" is
probably immediately understandable in most contexts. Not that I'm
fond of it.
--
Jerry Friedman
CDB
> Melissa wrote:
[the counter strikes back]
> So this is a counter to a reaction, like "counter-reformation" and
> "counter-revolution"? I'd unhesitatingly hyphen it, without fear of
> any convincing surrejoinder.
> "I can't believe it's not surrebutter," said Tom non-unctuously.
"But can you, like, surrey, man?", TOT rebutted soulfully.
Evan Kirshenbaum
I would take "counter-reaction" to be a reaction to a reaction, not a
reaction to an initial action.
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |The look on our faces isn't confusion.
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |It's disbelief.
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |
| Jon Stewart
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com
(650)857-7572
tony cooper
<kirsh...@hpl.hp.com> wrote:
>tony cooper <tony_co...@earthlink.net> writes:
>
>> On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 20:02:22 -0500, "Don Phillipson"
>> <e9...@SPAMBLOCK.ncf.ca> wrote:
>>
>>>"Melissa" <Meliss...@huntel.net> wrote in message
>>>news:890f4469-db4e-41e8...@u18g2000pro.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>>> Is "counterreaction" a word? It's listed in Webster's 11th under
>>>> the entry "counter-," but I'm still in doubt if I should use
>>>> it...seems like a hyphen would be better...counter-reaction.
>>>
>>>Better words are available (from the sport of fencing, traditionally
>>>labeled in French). An attack (by person A) may be followed by a
>>>riposte = counterattack (by person B) and then a remise (by person A
>>>again.)
>>
>> I've seen counter-reaction used in articles about the stock market.
>> A spate of selling in one area may spur a counter-reaction of buying
>> in another. I doubt if that would be described as a riposte.
>
>I would take "counter-reaction" to be a reaction to a reaction, not a
>reaction to an initial action.
Wouldn't a spate of selling be a reaction to a reaction when the
sellers are reacting to the reactions of the analysts to market
conditions.
Mike Lyle
It's not the length, it's the misleading pronunciation signal sent out
by the double "r". It appears to be calling for a stressed short "e" as
in "deterrent", but the reader knows that must be wrong, and has to do a
double-take. It wouldn't matter much with the familiar word
"counterrevolution" (though I don't really like that without a hyphen,
either); but I don't think I'd ever seen or heard "counter-reaction"
before. And I have to say, I'm not too sure I ever want to see it again.
--
Mike.
HVS
In the course of some research yesterday, I came across a record of
the "re-warding of locks" -- which struck me as a case of a non-
optional hyphen.
--
Cheers, Harvey
CanEng and BrEng, indiscriminately mixed
Skitt
> Skitt wrote:
>> Melissa wrote:
>>>> I agree with Mike and Peter in preferring the hyphen, but if I were
>>>> a copyeditor, I'd never change anything that a dictionary approves.
>>>
>>> That I am...best follow the rules...but I agree that counterreaction
>>> looks ridiculous.
>>
>> What do you say about "counterrevolution"? Both M-W Online and AHD4
>> have it as a single word. I don't see anything ridiculous about
>> "counterreaction". I can read well enough to handle long words. Of
>> course, I grew up in Germany.
>
> It's not the length, it's the misleading pronunciation signal sent out
> by the double "r". It appears to be calling for a stressed short "e"
> as in "deterrent", but the reader knows that must be wrong, and has
> to do a double-take.
I don't read letter by letter, so -- no double-take. I take in the whole
word pretty much at once.
> It wouldn't matter much with the familiar word
> "counterrevolution" (though I don't really like that without a hyphen,
> either); but I don't think I'd ever seen or heard "counter-reaction"
> before. And I have to say, I'm not too sure I ever want to see it
> again.
I don't think I've met "counterreaction" before.
--
Skitt (AmE)
not a reactionary
Evan Kirshenbaum
Could well be.
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |"Revolution" has many definitions.
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |From the looks of this, I'd say
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |"going around in circles" comes
|closest to applying...
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com | Richard M. Hartman
(650)857-7572
HVS
> Mike Lyle wrote:
>> Skitt wrote:
>>> What do you say about "counterrevolution"? Both M-W Online
>>> and AHD4 have it as a single word. I don't see anything
>>> ridiculous about "counterreaction". I can read well enough to
>>> handle long words. Of course, I grew up in Germany.
>>
>> It's not the length, it's the misleading pronunciation signal
>> sent out by the double "r". It appears to be calling for a
>> stressed short "e" as in "deterrent", but the reader knows that
>> must be wrong, and has to do a double-take.
>
> I don't read letter by letter, so -- no double-take. I take in
> the whole word pretty much at once.
I find the implicit assumption in there completely back to front, as
I'd expect those who read letter-by-letter would be the ones who
*don't* do the double take.
It's precisely because I take in whole words at once that I'm thrown
by non-hyphenated words like "cooperative" and "counterrevolution":
I have to go back and split the word apart to get it correct (which
wouldn't be the case if I was reading it letter by letter).
Skitt
Well, I don't see how taking in the whole word at once could result in a
double-take. Would it be caused by a non-recognition of the word? Not very
likely, I'd venture. At least, not in my case.
--
Skitt (AmE)
HVS
> HVS wrote:
Not exactly "non-recognition"; more because I "hear" whole words
when I see them. (I don't mean I sound the words out letter by
letter or even syllable by syllable; it's a less linear process
than that.)
Because my mind's ear hears words, there's a split second where I'm
not sure how to decode ambiguous letter combinations like "coop-"
and "-erre-" in the middle of them. (That is, it's the ambiguity
rather than non-recognition which requires me to dismantle the
constituent parts of the word and then re-assemble them letter by
letter.)
Robert Lieblich
[ ... ]
> In the course of some research yesterday, I came across a record of
> the "re-warding of locks" -- which struck me as a case of a non-
> optional hyphen.
Then there was the lady of the evening who was released from jail and
promptly re-plied her trade.
--
Bob Lieblich
Re-bating his breath
R H Draney
>
>HVS wrote:
>
>[ ... ]
>
>> In the course of some research yesterday, I came across a record of
>> the "re-warding of locks" -- which struck me as a case of a non-
>> optional hyphen.
>
>Then there was the lady of the evening who was released from jail and
>promptly re-plied her trade.
"Tie her up again!" Tom was recorded as saying....r
sipst...@my-deja.com
> HVS wrote:
>
> [ ... ]
>
> > In the course of some research yesterday, I came across a record of
> > the "re-warding of locks" -- which struck me as a case of a non-
> > optional hyphen.
>
> Then there was the lady of the evening who was released from jail and
> promptly re-plied her trade.
Sadly I don't believe for a moment that is
anything other than a clumsily contrived
construction which fails to encompass
the nature of trades - as occupations - in
its attempt to mirror real-life usages that
have caused confusion.
In short, I resent your email <grin>.
The re- prefix in the example you cite is
redundant--something no sex-worker is
ever likely to be.
It implies there is no sex trade in prisons;
as such it overlooks all manner of other
continuities.
> --
> Bob Lieblich
> Re-bating his breath
<smile> And then you go acquit yourself
with a beautiful little construction like that.
Begging the question of whether or not sand
blasting is a good way to reacquaint old
buildings.
G DAEB
COPYRIGHT (C) 2009 SIPSTON
--
Maria Conlon
> Robert Lieblich wrote:
>> HVS wrote:
>>
>> [ ... ]
>>
>>> In the course of some research yesterday, I came across a record of
>>> the "re-warding of locks" -- which struck me as a case of a non-
>>> optional hyphen.
I can't figure out "re-warding" means with regard to "locks." Was it some
reference to women giving ("rewarding") locks of their hair to men
(especially soldiers) they love?
>>
>> Then there was the lady of the evening who was released from jail and
>> promptly re-plied her trade.
Heh.
>
> Sadly I don't believe for a moment that is
> anything other than a clumsily contrived
> construction which fails to encompass
> the nature of trades - as occupations - in
> its attempt to mirror real-life usages that
> have caused confusion.
Maybe the word came at the end of a line and was hyphenated, and then when
it was later reprinted (on a different measure), the hyphen stayed in,
erroneously.
> In short, I resent your email <grin>.
>
> The re- prefix in the example you cite is
> redundant--something no sex-worker is
> ever likely to be.
>
> It implies there is no sex trade in prisons;
> as such it overlooks all manner of other
> continuities.
Huh? How does it imply that?
>
>> Bob Lieblich
>> Re-bating his breath
>
> <smile> And then you go acquit yourself
> with a beautiful little construction like that.
> Begging the question of whether or not sand
> blasting is a good way to reacquaint old
> buildings.
I think you may have misused "begging the question." It's hard to tell,
though, since you used it in an incomplete sentence.
>
> G DAEB
> COPYRIGHT (C) 2009 SIPSTON
Does that copyright mean I can't quote you on my Web site if you say
something great, something that makes me roar with laughter? (If I can't,
"hiss, boo" ą la Peter Duncanson.)
Maria Conlon, replying to all three posters above.
Robert Lieblich
>
> On Feb 27, 11:19 pm, Robert Lieblich <r_s_liebl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > HVS wrote:
> >
> > [ ... ]
> >
> > > In the course of some research yesterday, I came across a record of
> > > the "re-warding of locks" -- which struck me as a case of a non-
> > > optional hyphen.
> >
> > Then there was the lady of the evening who was released from jail and
> > promptly re-plied her trade.
>
> Sadly I don't believe for a moment that is
> anything other than a clumsily contrived
> construction which fails to encompass
> the nature of trades - as occupations - in
> its attempt to mirror real-life usages that
> have caused confusion.
I see you've figured me out.
> In short, I resent your email <grin>.
As I resemble yours.
But only I can resend it.
--
Bob Lieblich
All in fun
Nick
> G. Daeb wrote:
>> Robert Lieblich wrote:
>>> HVS wrote:
>>>
>>> [ ... ]
>>>
>>>> In the course of some research yesterday, I came across a record of
>>>> the "re-warding of locks" -- which struck me as a case of a non-
>>>> optional hyphen.
>
> I can't figure out "re-warding" means with regard to "locks." Was it
> some reference to women giving ("rewarding") locks of their hair to
> men (especially soldiers) they love?
The wards in some designs of lock are the bits that stop the key turning
if it hasn't got the necessary shape. So if you re-ward a lock, you'll
be setting it up to use a different key.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warded_lock
--
Online waterways route planner: http://canalplan.org.uk
development version: http://canalplan.eu
Wood Avens
<conlo...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>> HVS wrote:
>>>
>>> [ ... ]
>>>
>>>> In the course of some research yesterday, I came across a record of
>>>> the "re-warding of locks" -- which struck me as a case of a non-
>>>> optional hyphen.
>
>I can't figure out "re-warding" means with regard to "locks." Was it some
>reference to women giving ("rewarding") locks of their hair to men
>(especially soldiers) they love?
Not as such. It's locks as in keys. See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warded_lock
--
Katy Jennison
spamtrap: remove the first two letters after the @
R H Draney
>
>On Sat, 28 Feb 2009 12:06:27 -0500, "Maria Conlon"
><conlo...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>>>> HVS wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In the course of some research yesterday, I came across a record of
>>>>> the "re-warding of locks" -- which struck me as a case of a non-
>>>>> optional hyphen.
>>
>>I can't figure out "re-warding" means with regard to "locks." Was it some
>>reference to women giving ("rewarding") locks of their hair to men
>>(especially soldiers) they love?
>
>Not as such. It's locks as in keys. See
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warded_lock
But not lox as in quays....r
Chuck Riggs
<conlo...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>G. Daeb wrote:
<snip>
>> G DAEB
>> COPYRIGHT (C) 2009 SIPSTON
>
>Does that copyright mean I can't quote you on my Web site if you say
>something great, something that makes me roar with laughter? (If I can't,
>"hiss, boo" ą la Peter Duncanson.)
The simplest solution, it seems to me, would be to ask him before you
do.
--
Regards,
Chuck Riggs
Near Dublin, Ireland
Maria Conlon
Chuck Riggs wrote:
> Maria Conlon wrote:
>>G. Daeb wrote:
>>> [...]
>>> G DAEB
>>> COPYRIGHT (C) 2009 SIPSTON
>>
>>Does that copyright mean I can't quote you on my Web site if you say
>>something great, something that makes me roar with laughter? (If I
>>can't,
>>"hiss, boo" ą la Peter Duncanson.)
>
> The simplest solution, it seems to me, would be to ask him before you
> do.
I generally do ask people if I may quote them. (However, as I understand
it, there is no law about quoting people in newsgroups.)
--
Maria Conlon
R H Draney
>
>I generally do ask people if I may quote them. (However, as I understand
>it, there is no law about quoting people in newsgroups.)
I've been asked a few times, but Googling turns up quotes from me in all sorts
of places I didn't know existed....
Lex pollicis: one generally has no objection to being quoted by the sorts of
people who ask; the same is not always true of those who don't....r
Chuck Riggs
<conlo...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>
>Chuck Riggs wrote:
>> Maria Conlon wrote:
>>>G. Daeb wrote:
>
>>>> [...]
>>>> G DAEB
>>>> COPYRIGHT (C) 2009 SIPSTON
>>>
>>>Does that copyright mean I can't quote you on my Web site if you say
>>>something great, something that makes me roar with laughter? (If I
>>>can't,
>>>"hiss, boo" à la Peter Duncanson.)
>>
>> The simplest solution, it seems to me, would be to ask him before you
>> do.
>
>I generally do ask people if I may quote them. (However, as I understand
>it, there is no law about quoting people in newsgroups.)
Neither is there a law against sticking your thumbs in your ears, then
wiggling your fingers at passers-by, but it isn't nice.
CDB
> "Maria Conlon" wrote:
>> Chuck Riggs wrote:
>>> Maria Conlon wrote:
>>>> G. Daeb wrote:
>>>>> [...]
>>>>> G DAEB
>>>>> COPYRIGHT (C) 2009 SIPSTON
>>>> Does that copyright mean I can't quote you on my Web site if you
>>>> say something great, something that makes me roar with laughter?
>>>> (If I can't, "hiss, boo" ą la Peter Duncanson.)
>>> The simplest solution, it seems to me, would be to ask him before
>>> you do.
>> I generally do ask people if I may quote them. (However, as I
>> understand it, there is no law about quoting people in newsgroups.)
> Neither is there a law against sticking your thumbs in your ears,
> then wiggling your fingers at passers-by, but it isn't nice.
Ah, the gentle custom of byegone days. Gestures less nice than
"chucking the moose" have been common in these parts for many a year.
Maria Conlon
news:gof1r...@drn.newsguy.com...
> Maria Conlon filted:
>>
>>I generally do ask people if I may quote them. (However, as I
>>understand
>>it, there is no law about quoting people in newsgroups.)
>
> I've been asked a few times, but Googling turns up quotes from me in
> all sorts
> of places I didn't know existed....
Are there quotes of yours on my site that you would like me to remove? I
don't think I've asked you every time about using quotes.
> Lex pollicis: one generally has no objection to being quoted by the
> sorts of
> people who ask; the same is not always true of those who don't....r
To all reading this in AUE: If I have quoted you and you'd like the
material removed, please let me know.
On the other hand, if you feel comfortable with being quoted (on my Web
site) at any time, please let me know that, too.
Email me at: conlo...@sbcglobal.net
My Web site: http://www.familyhomefront.net/ Auer's are generally
quoted on the Miscellany page. (There are links to two previous
Miscellany pages on the present page.)
The last thing I want to do is quote someone who doesn't want to be
quoted. The fact is, though, that there are many "quotable quotes" in
AUE. Most of them are very clever.
--
Maria Conlon, resident of southeast Michigan, near Detroit; native of
east Tennessee.
Maria Conlon
> Maria Conlon wrote:
>> Chuck Riggs wrote:
>>> Maria Conlon wrote:
>>>> G. Daeb wrote:
>>
>>>>> [...]
>>>>> G DAEB
>>>>> COPYRIGHT (C) 2009 SIPSTON
>>>>
>>>> Does that copyright mean I can't quote you on my Web site if you
>>>> say
>>>> something great, something that makes me roar with laughter? (If I
>>>> can't,
>>>
>>> The simplest solution, it seems to me, would be to ask him before
>>> you
>>> do.
>>
>> I generally do ask people if I may quote them. (However, as I
>> understand
>> it, there is no law about quoting people in newsgroups.)
>
> Neither is there a law against sticking your thumbs in your ears, then
> wiggling your fingers at passers-by, but it isn't nice.
Well, if it's any solace to you, I don't think I've quoted you on my Web
site very often. I do have your short story there, though (with your
permission).
Any more stories to come, by the way?
Maria Conlon, who /tries/ to be nice.
Maria Conlon
> Ah, the gentle custom of byegone days. Gestures less nice than
> "chucking the moose" have been common in these parts for many a year.
I Googled "chucking the moose." Your post (above) was the only thing
shown. Have you bowdlerized the phrase?
--
Maria Conlon
R H Draney
>
>"R H Draney" <dado...@spamcop.net> wrote in message
>news:gof1r...@drn.newsguy.com...
>> Maria Conlon filted:
>>>
>>>I generally do ask people if I may quote them. (However, as I
>>>understand
>>>it, there is no law about quoting people in newsgroups.)
>>
>> I've been asked a few times, but Googling turns up quotes from me in
>> all sorts
>> of places I didn't know existed....
>
>Are there quotes of yours on my site that you would like me to remove? I
>don't think I've asked you every time about using quotes.
I just had a quick look, and the only thing that bothered me was trying to
figure out what "bijou-talking-point door stops" was supposed to mean, in the
bit on advantages of snakes as pets...turns out that was an addendum to my list
made by Archie Valparaiso....r
Chuck Riggs
I'll have to try harder.
It seems to me that if there is a problem with quoting snippets from
people's posts without their permission, it is that the quotes are
taken out of context. That is way I object, in general, to the
practice.
> I do have your short story there, though (with your
>permission).
>
>Any more stories to come, by the way?
After that disaster, you want another?
CDB
In the sense of "perpetrated"? I wanted something reminiscent of
"shooting the moon", but "shooting the moose" struck me as misleading.
And I am not averse to giving Chuck the occasional gentle elbow over
his attitude to our good name.
Maria Conlon
> Maria Conlon wrote:
>>
>> Well, if it's any solace to you, I don't think I've quoted you on my
>> Web
>> site very often.
>
> I'll have to try harder.
> It seems to me that if there is a problem with quoting snippets from
> people's posts without their permission, it is that the quotes are
> taken out of context.
What I quote is usually something clever or funny. Any context needed is
left in.
[...]
>> I do have your short story there, though (with your permission).
>>
>> Any more stories to come, by the way?
>
> After that disaster, you want another?
Disaster? News to me. Have you written others yet?
However, my Web site may be revamped soon, and limited to family viewers
and family-oriented things. And if that happens, I won't be quoting
AUEers any more, which may be a relief to some of you, though my
extended family loves the AUE quotes. So why stop? Because I don't want
to cause any problems for anyone in the group. (I will continue
presenting Jan Sand's poetry and Jim Follett's writings.)
--
Maria Conlon
Maria Conlon
> Maria Conlon wrote:
>> CDB wrote:
>
>>> Ah, the gentle custom of byegone days. Gestures less nice than
>>> "chucking the moose" have been common in these parts for many a
>>> year.
>
>> I Googled "chucking the moose." Your post (above) was the only thing
>> shown. Have you bowdlerized the phrase?
>
> In the sense of "perpetrated"? I wanted something reminiscent of
> "shooting the moon", but "shooting the moose" struck me as misleading.
Sure -- and unremarkable: Nothing unusual about shooting the moose -- in
season.
> And I am not averse to giving Chuck the occasional gentle elbow over
> his attitude to our good name.
You think he should go back to being called "Charles"? (I, for one,
still haven't adjusted to "Chuck.")
--
Maria Conlon
CDB
I wouldn't want to dictate his choice; I was a Chuck for many years
myself. I merely take mild exception to his expressed reasons for it.
I find that googling up the posting would take me all morning -- Chuck
is a prolific poster -- but my recollection is that "Charles" was
something no real man would ever want to be called.
Robert Bannister
Oddly enough, I read a phrase very much like this very recently in a
Kathy Reichs novel. I assumed it was Canadian for giving the finger.
--
Rob Bannister
Nick
I doubt whether anything I write here makes the grade, but my view is
that if I posted it on Usenet, and it's quoted with the source - both me
and the newsgroup - then that's fair use. I *do* get narked by sites
that lift content wholesale in the hope of getting ad-clicking traffic
and present it as though it's their own.
Chuck Riggs
wrote:
Having made the opposite choice myself, I'm distressed that you
changed your name from Chuck to Charles, not that preferring one
version over another is actually a change. If you later opt for the
third possibility, I'll really be in quandary, as easily influenced as
I am.
Chuck Riggs
<conlo...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>Chuck Riggs wrote:
>> Maria Conlon wrote:
<snip>
>>> Any more stories to come, by the way?
>>
>> After that disaster, you want another?
>
>Disaster? News to me. Have you written others yet?
In a documentary about the playwright Hugh Leonard last night, near
the end of his writing career he expressed the regret that he'd spent
too much time writing derisive newspaper columns and not enough time
on creative writing. For sure, I'm no Hugh Leonard, but it is AUE, not
the Irish Independent, that saps most of my creative time and energy.
AUE is my newspaper column, in which I'm more derisive than I might
be, and my millstone.
<snip>
CDB
I've never heard it used (or read one of Reichs's novels, FTM) and
googling other wordings doesn't turn up anything relevant, but I guess
it's possible. There are plenty of moose around here. It would have
to be the finger of all fingers.
CDB
[creative writing]
> AUE is my newspaper column, in which I'm more
> derisive than I might be, and my millstone.
I always thought one good thing about millstones was, they ground you.
Maria Conlon
>
> I doubt whether anything I write here makes the grade...
I'd have to look (which I haven't done yet). If you were part of a funny
thread, you may well be on the Web page.
> .....but my view is
> that if I posted it on Usenet, and it's quoted with the source - both
> me
> and the newsgroup - then that's fair use.
I don't use the name of the newsgroup (alt.usage.english) or even the
initials (AUE or aue) on the site. I do realize that if someone Googles
the phrase/words used on my site, the source(s) could pop up. (I doubt
than any of my readers bother Googling, and they don't know about
newsgroups, AFAIK.) I do use the names of the writers, pretty much as
those names appear in the group.
> .....I *do* get narked by sites
> that lift content wholesale in the hope of getting ad-clicking traffic
> and present it as though it's their own.
That's not something I do. I also don't have ads on the site (though I
wouldn't turn away an unpaid ad if it's for someone I know and trust).
I've had acouple of recent emails (from AUEers) giving me permission to
quote them, but I still haven't made up my mind. If I do go "private"
(new URL and all), I will certainly eliminate the "Miscellany Online"
quotes. It wouldn't be fair to quote any AUEers without their knowledge
(even if they've given me permission in the past for specific quotes).
Frankly, it was fun providing such good reading for my family and
friends. I'm rather sorry that objections have come up.
--
Maria Conlon
CDB
> On Tue, 3 Mar 2009 12:14:07 -0500, "CDB" <belle...@sympatico.ca>
> wrote:
>> Maria Conlon wrote:
[taking Chuck in vain]
>>> You think he should go back to being called "Charles"? (I, for
>>> one, still haven't adjusted to "Chuck.")
>> I wouldn't want to dictate his choice; I was a Chuck for many years
>> myself. I merely take mild exception to his expressed reasons for
>> it. I find that googling up the posting would take me all morning
>> -- Chuck is a prolific poster -- but my recollection is that
>> "Charles" was something no real man would ever want to be called.
> Having made the opposite choice myself, I'm distressed that you
> changed your name from Chuck to Charles, not that preferring one
> version over another is actually a change. If you later opt for the
> third possibility, I'll really be in quandary, as easily influenced
> as I am.
As you say, whatever one is called, one remains a boy named Charles.
I hope it won't unduly influence you if I say that I have been called
most of the common variants* of that, over the years, except for
"Chip". I took up the formal version mostly for use at work but, as I
made friends at the workplace, it came to seem more my proper name
than the nicknames did.
*Even "El Caballito" occasionally, in Mexico. I'm not sure I ever got
the point of that, unless it was just an aimless reference to the
Spanish king.
Maria Conlon
> Maria Conlon filted:
>>> Maria Conlon filted:
>>>>
>>>> I generally do ask people if I may quote them. (However, as I
>>>> understand
>>>> it, there is no law about quoting people in newsgroups.)
>>>
>>> I've been asked a few times, but Googling turns up quotes from me in
>>> all sorts
>>> of places I didn't know existed....
>>
>> Are there quotes of yours on my site that you would like me to
>> remove? I
>> don't think I've asked you every time about using quotes.
>
> I just had a quick look, and the only thing that bothered me was
> trying to
> figure out what "bijou-talking-point door stops" was supposed to mean,
> in the
> bit on advantages of snakes as pets...turns out that was an addendum
> to my list
> made by Archie Valparaiso....r
The error (which was all mine; no one else to blame) has been fixed.
Thanks for letting me know, and please accept my apology.
--
Maria Conlon
Chuck Riggs
<conlo...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
<snip>
>Frankly, it was fun providing such good reading for my family and
>friends. I'm rather sorry that objections have come up.
Most people like to be quoted in a conversation, but you might want to
ask their permission before you publish their words on the Internet.
Chuck Riggs
wrote:
Now, that name is impressive. "Chip" never crossed my mind as a
variation, probably because I've never known one.
CDB
[Carlos VI, "El Caballito"]
> Now, that name is impressive. "Chip" never crossed my mind as a
> variation, probably because I've never known one.
Not sure if "impressive" is the word. It definitely felt like a joke,
but I remain whooshed. Charles "Chipper" Laird was the school bully
when I was ten. He was no longer in our elementary school, but he
hung around anyway, to brutalise the littles.
Maria Conlon
> Maria Conlon wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> Frankly, it was fun providing such good reading for my family and
>> friends. I'm rather sorry that objections have come up.
>
> Most people like to be quoted in a conversation, but you might want to
> ask their permission before you publish their words on the Internet.
Perhaps you misunderstand. I do ask them. However, I will say it's
possible
that once or twice I've slipped up. I don't think so, but it's possible.
Some people have told me (in writing) that I may quote them at any time.
As it is, with your objections, I now feel that the whole business of
sharing some
great stuff from online is somehow wrong.
--
Maria Conlon
Robin Bignall
wrote:
The authorities tried to prevent that sort of thing from happening,
back in the 1940s. I went to a school complex which contained a mixed
infants' school (ages 5-8), mixed juniors' school (8-11) and separate
seniors' schools (11-15) for girls and boys, all on the same site. At
the end of the afternoon classes the infants and juniors were released
half an hour before the seniors so that they stood a chance of getting
home unmolested.
--
Robin
(BrE)
Herts, England
Robert Bannister
Most of our Australian schools do something similar, but the idea breaks
down as so many older kids have to escort their younger siblings home,
and it's difficult to work out which older students have a good reason
to be hanging around outside the primary or pre-primary school and which
are potential nuisances.
--
Rob Bannister
Chuck Riggs
Since you have my email address, I'm sorry you feel it necessary to
discuss this with me in public day after day, but since you have I
will say I am hurt that you wrongly accuse me of wanting to curtail
your fun. Are you trying to score points within AUE by kicking that
seemingly bad ogre, Chuck Riggs? I think you know me better.
Maria Conlon
> Maria Conlon wrote:
>>Chuck Riggs wrote:
>>> Maria Conlon wrote:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>> Frankly, it was fun providing such good reading for my family and
>>>> friends. I'm rather sorry that objections have come up.
>>>
>>> Most people like to be quoted in a conversation, but you might want
>>> to
>>> ask their permission before you publish their words on the Internet.
>>
>> Perhaps you misunderstand. I do ask them. However, I will say it's
>> possible
>> that once or twice I've slipped up. I don't think so, but it's
>> possible.
>>
>> Some people have told me (in writing) that I may quote them at any
>> time.
>>
>> As it is, with your objections, I now feel that the whole business of
>> sharing some great stuff from online is somehow wrong.
>
> Since you have my email address, I'm sorry you feel it necessary to
> discuss this with me in public day after day,
The subject of the discussion (quoting AUEers in other venues) has
relevancy to the group.
> .....but since you have I
> will say I am hurt that you wrongly accuse me of wanting to curtail
> your fun.
You've mentioned twice that I should ask for permission before
publishing anything other AUEers have said; I replied twice. My
intention was not to hurt you; my intention was to assure you (and
others) that I don't "publish" without permission. I also said that the
"permission" part may have slipped by me once or twice (though I don't
really feel that has ever been the case).
> .......Are you trying to score points within AUE by kicking that
> seemingly bad ogre, Chuck Riggs? I think you know me better.
There are no points being scored (by either party) as far as I know. And
I don't think of you as an "ogre."
As for email, I rarely send any lately, to anyone. That's probably a
temporary situation.
--
Maria Conlon
CDB
[quoting somebody]
> Are you trying to score points within AUE by kicking that
> seemingly bad ogre, Chuck Riggs? I think you know me better.
YA Arne H. Wilstrup, AICMFK.
CDB
>> [Carlos VI, "El Caballito"]
That sounds like Darfur. We just had Chipper to worry about, and we
used the playground equipment after hours. Anyway, I don't believe
the authorities ever found out about him. To do him justice, he
didn't cause any permanent injuries that I knew of; he was slow, and
largely avoided by kids his own age. And we all told adults as little
as possible about the real world.
Robin Bignall
Understood, but things were different 60 years ago. The "older" kids
who had to escort the little ones home were eleven or less, and in the
junior school. In large families, girls as young as ten were expected
to take on some of the responsibilities of their mothers. For some
reason that I never understood, because I was an only child possibly,
the real older kids, over eleven and in the senior school, didn't want
to know their younger siblings, or anyone else's kids, and found them
an irritation. Most of their behaviour was just boisterous rather
than malicious, but still scary for kids in the infants' school.
Of course there were real examples of bullying, and when discovered
the perps were subject to punishment that today would be described as
actual bodily harm. Also, the threat of being sent to Borstal was a
serious deterrent. Quite different!
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
<docr...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>Of course there were real examples of bullying, and when discovered
>the perps were subject to punishment that today would be described as
>actual bodily harm. Also, the threat of being sent to Borstal was a
>serious deterrent. Quite different!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borstal
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
HVS
> On Fri, 06 Mar 2009 21:56:29 +0000, Robin Bignall
><docr...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
>> Of course there were real examples of bullying, and when
>> discovered the perps were subject to punishment that today
>> would be described as actual bodily harm. Also, the threat of
>> being sent to Borstal was a serious deterrent. Quite
>> different!
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borstal
I'm not sure why you posted this link without any explanation at all
for doing so, but assume you're correcting his usage of it to refer
to reform schools and such-like.
If that's the case, may I be the first to say that the-pub-
conversation-called-Wikipedia is a laughably unacceptable authority
as an arbitrator of "correct" usage.
--
Cheers, Harvey
CanEng and BrEng, indiscriminately mixed
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
wrote:
>On 06 Mar 2009, Peter Duncanson (BrE) wrote
>
>> On Fri, 06 Mar 2009 21:56:29 +0000, Robin Bignall
>><docr...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Of course there were real examples of bullying, and when
>>> discovered the perps were subject to punishment that today
>>> would be described as actual bodily harm. Also, the threat of
>>> being sent to Borstal was a serious deterrent. Quite
>>> different!
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borstal
>
>I'm not sure why you posted this link without any explanation at all
>for doing so, but assume you're correcting his usage of it to refer
>to reform schools and such-like.
>
No correction intended. It was for information only.
>If that's the case, may I be the first to say that the-pub-
>conversation-called-Wikipedia is a laughably unacceptable authority
>as an arbitrator of "correct" usage.
--
HVS
> On Fri, 06 Mar 2009 22:33:02 GMT, HVS
> <use...@REMOVETHISwhhvs.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 06 Mar 2009, Peter Duncanson (BrE) wrote
>>
>>> On Fri, 06 Mar 2009 21:56:29 +0000, Robin Bignall
>>> <docr...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Of course there were real examples of bullying, and when
>>>> discovered the perps were subject to punishment that today
>>>> would be described as actual bodily harm. Also, the threat
>>>> of being sent to Borstal was a serious deterrent. Quite
>>>> different!
>>>
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borstal
>>
>> I'm not sure why you posted this link without any explanation
>> at all for doing so, but assume you're correcting his usage of
>> it to refer to reform schools and such-like.
>>
> No correction intended. It was for information only.
Ah; a pitfall of posting a stand-alone and unexplained link,
methinks.
the Omrud
> On Fri, 06 Mar 2009 21:56:29 +0000, Robin Bignall
> <docr...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
>> Of course there were real examples of bullying, and when discovered
>> the perps were subject to punishment that today would be described as
>> actual bodily harm. Also, the threat of being sent to Borstal was a
>> serious deterrent. Quite different!
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borstal
Some of my forebears are buried in Boarstall:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boarstall
--
David
Steve Hayes
>On 06 Mar 2009, Peter Duncanson (BrE) wrote
>
>> On Fri, 06 Mar 2009 22:33:02 GMT, HVS
>> <use...@REMOVETHISwhhvs.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> On 06 Mar 2009, Peter Duncanson (BrE) wrote
>>>>> Of course there were real examples of bullying, and when
>>>>> discovered the perps were subject to punishment that today
>>>>> would be described as actual bodily harm. Also, the threat
>>>>> of being sent to Borstal was a serious deterrent. Quite
>>>>> different!
>>>>
>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borstal
>>>
>>> I'm not sure why you posted this link without any explanation
>>> at all for doing so, but assume you're correcting his usage of
>>> it to refer to reform schools and such-like.
>>>
>> No correction intended. It was for information only.
>
>Ah; a pitfall of posting a stand-alone and unexplained link,
>methinks.
Hardly.
The link was not stand-alone, and was clearly intended to explain the
reference to "Borstal" for those not familiar with it.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
HVS
> On Fri, 06 Mar 2009 22:46:38 GMT, HVS
> <use...@REMOVETHISwhhvs.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 06 Mar 2009, Peter Duncanson (BrE) wrote
>>
>>> On Fri, 06 Mar 2009 22:33:02 GMT, HVS
>>> <use...@REMOVETHISwhhvs.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 06 Mar 2009, Peter Duncanson (BrE) wrote
>>>>>> Of course there were real examples of bullying, and when
>>>>>> discovered the perps were subject to punishment that today
>>>>>> would be described as actual bodily harm. Also, the threat
>>>>>> of being sent to Borstal was a serious deterrent. Quite
>>>>>> different!
>>>>>
>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borstal
>>>>
>>>> I'm not sure why you posted this link without any explanation
>>>> at all for doing so, but assume you're correcting his usage
>>>> of it to refer to reform schools and such-like.
>>>>
>>> No correction intended. It was for information only.
>>
>> Ah; a pitfall of posting a stand-alone and unexplained link,
>> methinks.
>
> Hardly.
>
> The link was not stand-alone, and was clearly intended to
> explain the reference to "Borstal" for those not familiar with
> it.
I cannot disagree more: the intent was *not* clear *at all*, as
Peter supplied absolutely no explanation for posting the link.
Indeed, I took it to be a reprimand to Robin on his usage of the
term, with reference to Wikipee as an authority on the "correct"
meaning.
the Omrud
I took it as an explanation of a term which would not be familiar to
non-Brits or to anybody under 30.
--
David
Steve Hayes
>On 07 Mar 2009, Steve Hayes wrote
>> The link was not stand-alone, and was clearly intended to
>> explain the reference to "Borstal" for those not familiar with
>> it.
>
>I cannot disagree more: the intent was *not* clear *at all*, as
>Peter supplied absolutely no explanation for posting the link.
>
>Indeed, I took it to be a reprimand to Robin on his usage of the
>term, with reference to Wikipee as an authority on the "correct"
>meaning.
I wanted to have another look at it, and had some difficulty, as when I went
there my computer stopped to "update" Firefox with a version that doesn't
work.
Eventually I managed to get in with Internet Explorer (which seems to indicate
that the latest Firefox update is fraudulent or broken), and I still can't see
what you complain of.
Robin posted a reference to Borstal, and Peter prosed a reference a couple of
lines below that explained it. I think the "Borstal" concept was fairly
well-known in the 1950s, but I've only rarely heard of it nowadays, and for
those born after 1960 or so it might not be known at all.
As Peter said, it was for information.
I don't think imputing bad motives to someone is a good idea, unless there is
a real indication of malice, which I didn't see.
Chuck Riggs
I hope so. I always enjoy hearing from you.
HVS
> On Sat, 07 Mar 2009 09:35:08 GMT, HVS
> <use...@REMOVETHISwhhvs.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 07 Mar 2009, Steve Hayes wrote
>
>>> The link was not stand-alone, and was clearly intended to
>>> explain the reference to "Borstal" for those not familiar with
>>> it.
>>
>> I cannot disagree more: the intent was *not* clear *at all*,
>> as Peter supplied absolutely no explanation for posting the
>> link.
>>
>> Indeed, I took it to be a reprimand to Robin on his usage of
>> the term, with reference to Wikipee as an authority on the
>> "correct" meaning.
>
> I wanted to have another look at it, and had some difficulty, as
> when I went there my computer stopped to "update" Firefox with a
> version that doesn't work.
>
> Eventually I managed to get in with Internet Explorer (which
> seems to indicate that the latest Firefox update is fraudulent
> or broken), and I still can't see what you complain of.
When I looked at it, it said something along the lines -- I'm
paraphrasing entirely here -- of "Borstal was a young offenders'
institution, often incorrectly used to refer to reformatory
schools".
> Robin posted a reference to Borstal, and Peter prosed a
> reference a couple of lines below that explained it. I think the
> "Borstal" concept was fairly well-known in the 1950s, but I've
> only rarely heard of it nowadays, and for those born after 1960
> or so it might not be known at all.
>
> As Peter said, it was for information.
I don't think that was clear until he clarified it; you obviously
think it was clear, and didn't need further clarification.
We'll have to differ on the issue of clarity.
HVS
That's apparently the case. I assumed it was more than "For those
of you who don't know what Borstal means, you can find an
explanation on Wikipedia".
If that's all it was, I find the implicit assumption that people
who can find their way to AUE might need help to locate a
definition of something that has its own entry in Wikipedia...well,
patronising, really.
Mileages clearly vary, and everyone else might take it as just
being helpful; it strikes me as a bit insulting.
Fran Kemmish
I find your reaction really puzzling, Harvey. I knew what a Borstal was
- apart from normal general knowledge, we had a group of Borstal boys on
a dig I worked on in 1969. I didn't find the posting of the link either
patronising or insulting. I clicked on it, and read the page.
I was also reminded that we used to have a regular poster on aue who
came from the village of Borstal.
Fran
the Omrud
> I was also reminded that we used to have a regular poster on aue who
> came from the village of Borstal.
Is that "Boarstall"? Near the M40? I've posted elsethread that I have
relatives in the churchyard.
--
David
Fran Kemmish
No, it was definitely "Borstal". I checked back on Google Groups to
confirm it. I'd post a link to the post if I knew how to do that, but
instead, I'll have to post a link to the page I pulled up:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/browse_thread/thread/39606612a380e5fe?hl=en&q=borstal+albert+alt.usage.english#fb323970fdfdd6b8
http://tinyurl.com/bo9a75
Fran
the Omrud
Thanks - I see it. It's a village in Kent.
--
David
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
wrote:
My impression is that Harvey is a perfectionist. He is acutely aware of
the varying quality and accuracy of Wikipedia articles. Many of us find
Wikipedia useful in spite of its imperfections.
>>
>>Mileages clearly vary, and everyone else might take it as just
>>being helpful; it strikes me as a bit insulting.
I hope I am not misrepresenting your position Harvey, but you seem to
find any link to or quotation from Wikipedia almost morally offensive,
or at the very least, irritating and unsettling.
This may affect your judgement regarding the intentions of the person
providing the link or quotation.
> I knew what a Borstal was
>- apart from normal general knowledge, we had a group of Borstal boys on
>a dig I worked on in 1969. I didn't find the posting of the link either
>patronising or insulting. I clicked on it, and read the page.
>
>I was also reminded that we used to have a regular poster on aue who
>came from the village of Borstal.
>
>Fran
>
>
--
Mike Lyle
One of my girls was at a drama summer school there, way back. ISTR their
base was some sort of old tower, and the pattern of fields on a hillside
nearby was considered the inspiration for the chessboard fields in
/Through the Looking-Glass/.
This must have been the tower:
<http://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/main/w-boarstalltower>
--
Mike.
LFS
Seems plausible althoug, from there, you'd be looking in the opposite
direction to Carroll who, I believe, observed the landscape which
inspired him from either Beckley or Noke. We used to pick raspberries at
a farm on a hill near Noke. One summer we took my aged aunt with us and
sat her in a chair to look at the view while we picked. "What a
wonderful outlook, it's just like a chessboard," she observed, knowing
nothing of the Carroll link.
--
Laura
(emulate St. George for email)
the Omrud
Oooh, yes, and it's NT so we could go for nowt. I've only ever been to
the village for funerals - the elders I knew who came from there had
long since moved to Oxford by the time I was born.
--
David
Lars Enderin
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
wrote:
No. National Trust (as in the url's domain name).
It is an organisation of which I am a member.
http://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/main/w-trust/w-thecharity/w-history_trust.htm
The National Trust was founded in 1895 by three Victorian
philanthropists - Miss Octavia Hill, Sir Robert Hunter and Canon
Hardwicke Rawnsley. Concerned about the impact of uncontrolled
development and industrialisation, they set up the Trust to act as a
guardian for the nation in the acquisition and protection of
threatened coastline, countryside and buildings.
More than a century later, we now care for over 248,000 hectares
(612,000 acres) of beautiful countryside in England, Wales and
Northern Ireland, plus more than 700 miles of coastline and more
than 200 buildings and gardens of outstanding interest and
importance.
Most of these properties are held in perpetuity and so their future
protection is secure. The vast majority are open to visitors and we
are constantly looking at ways in which we can improve public access
and on-site facilities.
We are a registered charity and completely independent of
Government, therefore relying heavily on the generosity of our
subscribing members (now numbering over 3.5 million) and other
supporters.
HVS
(I wrote)
>>> Mileages clearly vary, and everyone else might take it as just
>>> being helpful; it strikes me as a bit insulting.
>
> I hope I am not misrepresenting your position Harvey, but you
> seem to find any link to or quotation from Wikipedia almost
> morally offensive, or at the very least, irritating and
> unsettling.
>
> This may affect your judgement regarding the intentions of the
> person providing the link or quotation.
That might well be part of it -- you're absolutely right that I
dislike any hint that Wikipedia is being used as some sort of
reference authority, for anything.
But I don't think it accounts entirely for my negative reaction to
your post. (The strength of my reaction surprised me a bit,
actually.)
I honestly didn't expect your unannotated link to be explanatory for
something as widely known -- or as searchable, if one didn't know --
as "Borstal". It strikes me like posting explanatory dictionary
links each time someone sees words like "toque", "Morris Minor",
"chitlins", or any other geographically- or time-specific term.
So not having thought of that, when I looked at the Wikipedia link --
knowing that it would be about Borstals -- the only reason I could
see for linking to it was the article's first-paragraph comment about
the common mis-use of the word. At which point my anti-Wikipedia-as-
an-authority quirk kicked in.
That's why my follow-up said that it highlighted the perils of non-
explained links; if you'd included something like "For those who
have no idea what a Borstal might be, here's an explanation", I don't
think I'd have replied at all.
(I might still have thought "Couldn't they have figured out how to do
that themselves?" -- but I don't think I'd have commented on it.)
I really don't mean to pick a fight on this -- and I'm clearly in a
minority. But I do feel that when one posts a link - to anything,
not just Wikipedia -- it's advisable to mention why it's being posted
unless there's some reason (like springing a surprise) for not doing
so.
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
wrote:
I normal give a least a brief explanation when posting a link. I'll try
to ensure that I always do in future.
HVS
Well, as I've explained (I hope) in more detail to Peter, it simply
didn't occur to me that someone would post a pointer simply to
define a word as easily-searchable as "Borstal". Knowing that's
the reason for it, it strikes me as the same as posting a link to
explain "workhouse", or "Stanley Steamer".
If I'd known that was the reason for posting the link, I'd not have
said anything. (I might well have thought "Hmmm....that's a bit
patronising" -- but I'm fairly sure I wouldn't have posted a
response.)
HVS
It seems others understood your intention without it, though -- so
far, I seem to be in a minority of one on this. (Not the first time
that's happened, but there ya' go...)
the Omrud
> On Sat, 07 Mar 2009 19:19:26 GMT, Lars Enderin <lars.e...@telia.com>
> wrote:
>
>> the Omrud wrote:
>>> Mike Lyle wrote:
>>>> the Omrud wrote:
>>>>> Fran Kemmish wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I was also reminded that we used to have a regular poster on aue who
>>>>>> came from the village of Borstal.
>>>>> Is that "Boarstall"? Near the M40? I've posted elsethread that I
>>>>> have relatives in the churchyard.
>>>> One of my girls was at a drama summer school there, way back. ISTR
>>>> their base was some sort of old tower, and the pattern of fields on a
>>>> hillside nearby was considered the inspiration for the chessboard
>>>> fields in /Through the Looking-Glass/.
>>>>
>>>> This must have been the tower:
>>>> <http://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/main/w-boarstalltower>
>>> Oooh, yes, and it's NT so we could go for nowt. I've only ever been to
>>> the village for funerals - the elders I knew who came from there had
>>> long since moved to Oxford by the time I was born.
>>>
>> I'm curious: Does NT stand for National Treasure?
>
> No. National Trust (as in the url's domain name).
> It is an organisation of which I am a member.
Me too (actually *us* too, as we have a Family membership), which is why
I could visit the tower without paying.
--
David
Robin Bignall
So did I. I was writing from the POV of a schoolboy in the 1950s. We
had heard of Borstals, to which wicked children were sent, but we had
no idea of their actuality. In fact the physical punishment regime at
my school was probably far worse than Borstal. Part of that was
because we had large classes (40 or more) of kids who had been
condemned by the eleven-plus to be future diggers of ditches, lorry
drivers and, if lucky, apprentice electricians or motor mechanics.
Some of us realised that and were a bit resentful. Most of the others
didn't but were bored with school, after they reached puberty, because
it prevented them from going out to work and buying a motorbike.
Classes with certain teachers who couldn't control the kids turned
into mini-riots and the strap (tawse) was in frequent use, but none of
the kids did anything serious enough to get sent away.
When we were 14 and in our final year the local council had one of its
wappy ideas, as councils do, and put a 15-year-old Borstal boy into
our class. He was bigger than any of us, tough and nasty, and his
bullying attracted so much attention that he was sent back after a
month. This tended to confirm all of our beliefs about Borstals, which
we considered were full of nasty, bullying kids and not places to be
sent to. The reality of Borstal was that they achieved results by
having strict discipline and a much lower pupil/teacher ratio than
secondary schools.
--
Robin
(BrE)
Herts, England
Steve Hayes
<ma...@peterduncanson.net> wrote:
>On Sat, 07 Mar 2009 21:10:11 GMT, HVS <use...@REMOVETHISwhhvs.co.uk>
>wrote:
>>I really don't mean to pick a fight on this -- and I'm clearly in a
>>minority. But I do feel that when one posts a link - to anything,
>>not just Wikipedia -- it's advisable to mention why it's being posted
>>unless there's some reason (like springing a surprise) for not doing
>>so.
>
>I normal give a least a brief explanation when posting a link. I'll try
>to ensure that I always do in future.
I have a rant against unexplained links, which I sometimes post in reponse to
unexplained links:
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/peeves.htm
http://hayesfam/bravehost.com/peeves.htm
But the kind of unexplained link I object to is usually one where there is a
posting with only a link and nothing else.
I thought your link was sufficiently explained by the context.
Robert Bannister
> When we were 14 and in our final year the local council had one of its
> wappy ideas, as councils do, and put a 15-year-old Borstal boy into
> our class. He was bigger than any of us, tough and nasty, and his
> bullying attracted so much attention that he was sent back after a
> month. This tended to confirm all of our beliefs about Borstals, which
> we considered were full of nasty, bullying kids and not places to be
> sent to.
Different experiences: two of my best friends when I was young had been
to Borstal. Neither was nasty or a bully, although one was a bit
"rough", which was hardly surprising considering his family.
--
Rob Bannister