Pulit Surprise.
Rushtown
ie, funny misunderstandings as a child.
1) Pulitizer Prize = (I thought) Pulit Surprise.
2) Pia Zadora = Pi Isadora.
3) Pheasant = Peasant. I asked my parents to have
Peasant for dinner, once.
Benjamin Krefetz
I know someone who once wondered what "forspacious" meant, as in, "Oh
beautiful, forspacious skies..."
Ben
Richard Fontana
> I know someone who once wondered what "forspacious" meant, as in, "Oh
> beautiful, forspacious skies..."
I remember thinking (in third grade) that the Wind Chill Factor was
the Winchell Factor.
Richard
Murray Arnow
> Rushtown <rush...@aol.com> spewed forth:
>> More thoughts on a semi-periodically repeated threat:
>> ie, funny misunderstandings as a child.
>> 1) Pulitizer Prize = (I thought) Pulit Surprise.
>> 2) Pia Zadora = Pi Isadora.
>> 3) Pheasant = Peasant. I asked my parents to have
>> Peasant for dinner, once.
> I know someone who once wondered what "forspacious" meant, as in, "Oh
> beautiful, forspacious skies..."
Forspacious, aren't those the snacks they serve before dinner?
nancy g.
> Previously, on alt.usage.english, Benjamin Krefetz said:
>> "Oh beautiful, forspacious skies..."
> was the Winchell Factor.
Anyone who's read the "Ramona" series of books to their
children will remember how Ramona learned the song about
the "Donzer Lee light"
(The one that starts out "Oh, say, can you see ...")
Skitt
nancy g. <nan...@tiac.net> wrote in message
news:37C2E32F...@tiac.net...
Not "Jose, can you see ..."? Darn!
--
Skitt (on Florida's Space Coast) http://skitt.i.am/
CAUTION: My veracity is under a limited warranty
William Lieblich
>
> Richard Fontana wrote:
>
> > Previously, on alt.usage.english, Benjamin Krefetz said:
>
> >> I know someone who once wondered what "forspacious" meant, as in,
> >> "Oh beautiful, forspacious skies..."
>
> > I remember thinking (in third grade) that the Wind Chill Factor
> > was the Winchell Factor.
>
> Anyone who's read the "Ramona" series of books to their
> children will remember how Ramona learned the song about
> the "Donzer Lee light"
>
> (The one that starts out "Oh, say, can you see ...")
In the days before the First Amendment was taken seriously in U.S.
schools, I was puzzled by "Gladly the Cross-Eyed Bear."
--
Bill Lieblich
Robert Lieblich
>
> Rushtown <rush...@aol.com> spewed forth:
> > More thoughts on a semi-periodically repeated threat:
> > ie, funny misunderstandings as a child.
> > 1) Pulitizer Prize = (I thought) Pulit Surprise.
>
> > 2) Pia Zadora = Pi Isadora.
>
> > 3) Pheasant = Peasant. I asked my parents to have
> > Peasant for dinner, once.
>
> beautiful, forspacious skies..."
Okay, so we're mondegreening again.
Interestingly, there are hundreds upon hundreds of postings collected by
deja.com containing the phrase "pullet surprise" (obviously an edible
concoction featuring poultry, and thereby squarely on topic for AUE).
I didn't find any recent ones on AUE.
The Weekly Standard had an interesting editorial last week, following up
on something from William Safire's column a couple of weeks ago, about
"Clara Bow's Syndrome." (I think it was "syndrome"; I'm sure about
Clara Bow. It strikes young, immature women and girls who fall in love
with an older, powerful man who then frequently takes advantage of them.
Bob Woodward includes it, with Clinton as the powerful man and a certain
young woman whose middle name is Samille as the young womasn.
The Weekly Standard editorial (which is no longer on the Web -- a new
issue has been posted, and the WS seems not to have archives) comments
on the denial by Clinton's lawyers that Monica L. suffered from any such
thing as Clara Bow's Syndrome. They deny even that there is such a
thing. And they are absolutely right about that. The syndrome in
question is named for its discoverer, a Frenchman named Clerambault.
Clara Bow had nothing to do with it.
Mr, Woodward has violated the first rule of journalism -- spell the
names right. He has also given Clinton's lawyers a great opportunity
for obfuscation-- which they seized.
Bob Lieblich
M.J.Powell
writes
>nancy g. wrote:
>>
>> Richard Fontana wrote:
>>
>> > Previously, on alt.usage.english, Benjamin Krefetz said:
>>
>> >> "Oh beautiful, forspacious skies..."
>>
>> > was the Winchell Factor.
>>
>> Anyone who's read the "Ramona" series of books to their
>> children will remember how Ramona learned the song about
>> the "Donzer Lee light"
>>
>> (The one that starts out "Oh, say, can you see ...")
>
>In the days before the First Amendment was taken seriously in U.S.
>schools, I was puzzled by "Gladly the Cross-Eyed Bear."
Because 'Thames' is pronounced 'Tems' for years I thought London had two
main rivers.
--
Mike The life that I have
Is all that I have
And the life that I have
Is yours.
Larry Phillips
>
> Because 'Thames' is pronounced 'Tems' for years I thought London had
> two main rivers.
I remember, as if it were yesterday, asking my father what the
difference was between 'suttle' and 'sub-tle'.
--
I want to die quietly in my sleep, like my grandfather,
not screaming in terror, like his passengers.
Polar
<lieb...@erols.com> wrote:
[...]
>The Weekly Standard had an interesting editorial last week, following up
>on something from William Safire's column a couple of weeks ago, about
>"Clara Bow's Syndrome." (I think it was "syndrome"; I'm sure about
>Clara Bow. It strikes young, immature women and girls who fall in love
>with an older, powerful man who then frequently takes advantage of them.
>Bob Woodward includes it, with Clinton as the powerful man and a certain
>young woman whose middle name is Samille as the young womasn.
[...]
Uh, the "young, immature woman" you're referring to -- would that be
the same y.i.w. who had a multi-year affair with a married man while
she was living in a NW state? And whose landlord testified that she
kept a bowl of contraceptives by her bed?
--
Polar
TsuiDF
>
> M.J.Powell wrote:
> >
> > Because 'Thames' is pronounced 'Tems' for years I thought London had
> > two main rivers.
>
> I remember, as if it were yesterday, asking my father what the
> difference was between 'suttle' and 'sub-tle'.
I remember my father exclaiming that he had been 'mizld' about the
pronunciation of 'misled'!
Stephanie M in M20
PS -- re the subject line, you don't have to be chicken here! On the
other hand, you could be poussin your luck . . .
Robert Lieblich
Adults are supposed to demonstrate judgment and self-control. I rest my
case.
Bob Lieblich
Polar
Kahn) wrote:
>On Wed, 25 Aug 1999 09:16:12 GMT, sme...@mindspring.com (Polar) wrote:
>
>>Uh, the "young, immature woman" you're referring to -- would that be
>>the same y.i.w. who had a multi-year affair with a married man while
>>she was living in a NW state? And whose landlord testified that she
>>kept a bowl of contraceptives by her bed?
>
>To me, it doesn't say much for this landlord's credibility that he was
>poking around in his tenant's bedroom.
I do not know, and I suspect you may not either, whether the landlord
was "poking about": in his tenant's bedroom.
Interesting how you came up with that hypothesis as opposed to, say,
another -- one of many possible scenarios -- that he was there by, uh,
invitation.
--
Polar
Polar
<lieb...@erols.com> wrote:
>Polar wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 24 Aug 1999 18:10:07 -0400, Robert Lieblich
>> <lieb...@erols.com> wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> >The Weekly Standard had an interesting editorial last week, following up
>> >on something from William Safire's column a couple of weeks ago, about
>> >"Clara Bow's Syndrome." (I think it was "syndrome"; I'm sure about
>> >Clara Bow. It strikes young, immature women and girls who fall in love
>> >with an older, powerful man who then frequently takes advantage of them.
>> >Bob Woodward includes it, with Clinton as the powerful man and a certain
>> >young woman whose middle name is Samille as the young womasn.
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> Uh, the "young, immature woman" you're referring to -- would that be
>> the same y.i.w. who had a multi-year affair with a married man while
>> she was living in a NW state? And whose landlord testified that she
>> kept a bowl of contraceptives by her bed?
>
>Adults are supposed to demonstrate judgment and self-control. I rest my
>case.
It is certainly true that Miss Uh did NOT demonstrate judgment and
self-control when she flipped her clothes up to show her thong
underwear to the President of the United States.
Please don't conclude that I am exonerating that weak creature of
expediency, ledit Presdenunitstates (as pronounced by newscasters);
I'm merely pointing out that there's blame enough to go around.
Just as one can glean quite about about the Prez by examining his
family background, so can one gain understanding of Miss Uh by
examining her "princess" b.g. Enuff about her mother has made it to
the media so that one gets a notion of how her "values" developed.
--
Polar
Chris Conner
Polar <sme...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>Just as one can glean quite about about the Prez by examining his
>family background, so can one gain understanding of Miss Uh by
>examining her "princess" b.g.
It took me several seconds to figure out what "b.g." meant here,
even though "background" was found in the line above. Is "b.g." a common
abbreviation for "background" in some area I'm not familiar with?
--
Chris Conner
Michael Cargal
>>Adults are supposed to demonstrate judgment and self-control. I rest my
>>case.
By that definition, how many adults would you say were involved in the
whole sorry mess?
--
Michael Cargal car...@cts.com
Polar
wrote:
AFAIK, it's very common in many fields. Sages?
--
Polar
Robert Lieblich
>
> >On Wed, 25 Aug 1999 07:17:32 -0400, Robert Lieblich
>
> >>Adults are supposed to demonstrate judgment and self-control. I rest my
> >>case.
>
> By that definition, how many adults would you say were involved in the
> whole sorry mess?
Only me. And I'm not talking.
Larry Phillips
> PS -- re the subject line, you don't have to be chicken here! On the
> other hand, you could be poussin your luck . . .
Next thing you know, you'll be putting your capon and cochin the lad.
ObAUE: I heard a newscaster this evening, say "His name was bantied
about as a possibility."
Skitt
Larry Phillips <lar...@home.com> wrote in message
news:37C4CC94...@home.com...
> TsuiDF wrote:
>
> > PS -- re the subject line, you don't have to be chicken here! On the
> > other hand, you could be poussin your luck . . .
>
> Next thing you know, you'll be putting your capon and cochin the lad.
>
> ObAUE: I heard a newscaster this evening, say "His name was bantied
> about as a possibility."
Could you really distinguish whether he said that or "bandied about"?
Anandashankar Mazumdar
sme...@mindspring.com wrote:
Maybe it's common in specific fields as a kind of jargon, but I
don't think it's a generally used abbreviation. I also did not
immediately understand its meaning.
Ananda
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
nancy g.
> >> It took me several seconds to figure out what "b.g." meant here,
> >> even though "background" was found in the line above. Is "b.g."
> >> a common abbreviation for "background" in some area I'm not familiar
> >> with?
>> AFAIK, it's very common in many fields. Sages?
> Maybe it's common in specific fields as a kind of jargon, but
> I don't think it's a generally used abbreviation. I also did not
> immediately understand its meaning.
Nor did I. I didn't understand it at all until I saw the
explanation in a later post.
I'm also not sure I agree that the abbreviation for "background"
would be "b.g." anyway. I believe that it *is* used that way --
I don't mean to sound like I'm accusing any of our regulars of lying --
but it just doesn't seem quite right to me.
Polar
wrote:
>Anandashankar Mazumdar wrote:
>
>> >> It took me several seconds to figure out what "b.g." meant here,
>> >> even though "background" was found in the line above. Is "b.g."
>> >> a common abbreviation for "background" in some area I'm not familiar
>> >> with?
>
>>> AFAIK, it's very common in many fields. Sages?
>
>> Maybe it's common in specific fields as a kind of jargon,
You may be right, at least as far as the picture business is
concerned. I am so used to seeing "b.g." in scripts, that I may have
assumed erroneously that it extends to other fields.
but
>> I don't think it's a generally used abbreviation. I also did not
>> immediately understand its meaning.
>
>
>Nor did I. I didn't understand it at all until I saw the
>explanation in a later post.
>
>I'm also not sure I agree that the abbreviation for "background"
>would be "b.g." anyway. I believe that it *is* used that way --
>I don't mean to sound like I'm accusing any of our regulars of lying --
>but it just doesn't seem quite right to me.
OK, what do you think would be a better abbreviation? I have no
investment in b.g. or not b.g. - just curious.
--
Polar
Gwen Lenker
<amaz...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>In article <37ce3978...@news.mindspring.com>,
> sme...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
>> On 25 Aug 1999 18:30:16 GMT, cco...@u.washington.edu (Chris Conner)
>> wrote:
>
>> >In article <37c7302...@news.mindspring.com>,
>> >Polar <sme...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>> > >Just as one can glean quite about about the Prez by examining his
>> > >family background, so can one gain understanding of Miss Uh by
>> > >examining her "princess" b.g.
>
>> > It took me several seconds to figure out what "b.g." meant here,
>> >even though "background" was found in the line above. Is "b.g." a
>> >common abbreviation for "background" in some area I'm not familiar
>> >with?
>
>> AFAIK, it's very common in many fields. Sages?
>
> Maybe it's common in specific fields as a kind of jargon, but I
>don't think it's a generally used abbreviation. I also did not
>immediately understand its meaning.
I understood it, but "b.g." (or even "b/g") in the multimedia
software industry either modifed "music" or referred to the
static picture against which an animation played out. I think
this was the first time I've seen it used as a synonym for
"personal history."
Richard Fontana
[re abbreviating 'background' as 'b.g.']
> On Thu, 26 Aug 1999 14:23:20 -0400, "nancy g." <nan...@tiac.net>
> wrote:
>
> >> Maybe it's common in specific fields as a kind of jargon,
>
> You may be right, at least as far as the picture business is
> concerned. I am so used to seeing "b.g." in scripts, that I may have
> assumed erroneously that it extends to other fields.
>
> but
> >> I don't think it's a generally used abbreviation. I also did not
> >> immediately understand its meaning.
> >
> >
> >Nor did I. I didn't understand it at all until I saw the
> >explanation in a later post.
> >
> >I'm also not sure I agree that the abbreviation for "background"
> >would be "b.g." anyway. I believe that it *is* used that way --
> >I don't mean to sound like I'm accusing any of our regulars of lying --
> >but it just doesn't seem quite right to me.
>
> OK, what do you think would be a better abbreviation? I have no
> investment in b.g. or not b.g. - just curious.
I've often used "bkgd" when taking notes. It's no longer than "b.g."
and not much longer than "b/g". I can't see how either of these
alternatives can be considered more legitimate.
I also had never seen "b.g" before.
Richard
Skitt
Polar <sme...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:37c78cdf...@news.mindspring.com...
> On Thu, 26 Aug 1999 14:23:20 -0400, "nancy g." <nan...@tiac.net>
> wrote:
>
> >I'm also not sure I agree that the abbreviation for "background"
> >would be "b.g." anyway. I believe that it *is* used that way --
> >I don't mean to sound like I'm accusing any of our regulars of lying --
> >but it just doesn't seem quite right to me.
>
> OK, what do you think would be a better abbreviation? I have no
> investment in b.g. or not b.g. - just curious.
Well, outside of the specialized field where b.g. would be instantly
recognized, I'd recommend not picking on this particular word for
abbreviating. If for some strange reason your fingers are too tired to type
out the entire word, do something like "bkgnd." I.t.t.i.m.b. D.y?
--
Skitt (on Florida's Space Coast) http://i.am/skitt/
... information is gushing toward your brain like a fire hose aimed
at a teacup. -- Dogbert
TsuiDF
intuitively understood it. Could be too many years of working inside
the Beltway when I was young and impressionable gave me terminal
acronym-itis, initialitis, or some such.
It must be the sort of thing you figure out while studying cv's for mo's
and wondering why greengrocer's can't apostrophise.
Stephanie M in M20 who used to work in USDOC/ITA/OPRCHK -- but I'm sure
I'm forgetting a few letters in there
Chris Kern
following:
>More thoughts on a semi-periodically repeated threat:
>ie, funny misunderstandings as a child.
>1) Pulitizer Prize = (I thought) Pulit Surprise.
I use to wonder about the Tajma Hall in India....
-Chris
Perchprism
>From: "Skitt" sk...@i.am
>Date: Thu, 26 August 1999 04:45 PM EDT
>Message-id: <7q490i$po4$1...@fir.prod.itd.earthlink.net>
>
>
>Polar <sme...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>news:37c78cdf...@news.mindspring.com...
>> On Thu, 26 Aug 1999 14:23:20 -0400, "nancy g." <nan...@tiac.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >I'm also not sure I agree that the abbreviation for "background"
>> >would be "b.g." anyway. I believe that it *is* used that way --
>> >I don't mean to sound like I'm accusing any of our regulars of lying --
>> >but it just doesn't seem quite right to me.
>>
>> OK, what do you think would be a better abbreviation? I have no
>> investment in b.g. or not b.g. - just curious.
>
>Well, outside of the specialized field where b.g. would be instantly
>recognized, I'd recommend not picking on this particular word for
>abbreviating. If for some strange reason your fingers are too tired to type
>out the entire word, do something like "bkgnd." I.t.t.i.m.b. D.y?
That's really weird. I could read that last bit easily. Great minds?
Don't use "b.g." for "background. Not many will get it. I didn't.
Perchprism
(southern New Jersey, near Philadelphia)
Polar
<ev...@garrett.hpl.hp.com> wrote:
>tru...@ibm.net (Truly Donovan) writes:
>
>> On Thu, 26 Aug 1999 18:53:32 GMT, sme...@mindspring.com (Polar) wrote:
>>
>> >On Thu, 26 Aug 1999 14:23:20 -0400, "nancy g." <nan...@tiac.net>
>> >wrote:
>>
>> >>I'm also not sure I agree that the abbreviation for "background"
>> >>would be "b.g." anyway. I believe that it *is* used that way -- I
>> >>don't mean to sound like I'm accusing any of our regulars of lying
>> >>-- but it just doesn't seem quite right to me.
>> >
>> >OK, what do you think would be a better abbreviation? I have no
>> >investment in b.g. or not b.g. - just curious.
>>
>> Uh, most of us don't feel the need to abbreviate it.
>
>If you had to specify the background color for a lot of display
>elements, you'd be thankful that "-bg" was an acceptable alias for
>"-background". (In X at Tk, at least.) "-fg" is an alias for
>"-foreground".
Also if you had to specify "background" throughout a script, the
abbreviation would come in handy. In fact, full spelling might denote
an amateur. Shorthand terms for shots, such as CU, ECU, MS, FS, etc.
are accepted usage in the Industry.
--
Polar