look up the sky or look up at the sky?

[Yurui Liu]

Which one is correct- look up the sky or look up at the sky?

I found both on Google.

[CDB]

On 08/11/2013 8:18 AM, Yurui Liu wrote:

> Which one is correct- look up the sky or look up at the sky?

> I found both on Google.

Usually the version with "at" which means that you're looking at the
sky, which is above you.

The other version might have some use as an instruction to look into the
sky, but at a point higher than the one you are looking at. It sounds
strange to me, though.

There is also the verb phrase "to look up X", to search for (and often
find) X" in a reference book. I include that for completeness, because
there is not much context to go by.

[Ian Jackson]

In message <2463799e-ce24-4fa7...@googlegroups.com>,
Yurui Liu <liuyur...@gmail.com> writes

>Which one is correct- look up the sky or look up at the sky?
>
>I found both on Google.

"Look up the sky" is not correct. There are references to it on Google,
but it is not normal English. See:
http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=2225249

The sky is considered to be just like any other object, so you normally
"look at" it. As it is above you, you can also "look up at" it
(especially if you have to lift your head).

There are some times when you might say "look up the xxxx", but this
usually means "look through the xxxx" or "look into the xxxx" - as in,
for example) "look up the pipe". [Note that the pipe could be at any
angle between horizontal and vertically upwards. If it was between
horizontal and vertically downwards, you would obviously "look down the
pipe"!]
--
Ian

[Tony Cooper]

The only version above that makes sense is the one using "at".
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando FL

[Leslie Danks]

Tony Cooper wrote:

> On Fri, 8 Nov 2013 05:18:49 -0800 (PST), Yurui Liu
> <liuyur...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Which one is correct- look up the sky or look up at the sky?
>>
>>I found both on Google.
>
> The only version above that makes sense is the one using "at".

Unless one is interested in a detailed description of a new model of
something that has been named the "sky" by capital-haters in the marketing
department.

--
Les (BrE)

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Friday, November 8, 2013 8:24:54 AM UTC-5, CDB wrote:
> On 08/11/2013 8:18 AM, Yurui Liu wrote:

> > Which one is correct- look up the sky or look up at the sky?
> > I found both on Google.
>
> Usually the version with "at" which means that you're looking at the
> sky, which is above you.
>
> The other version might have some use as an instruction to look into the
> sky, but at a point higher than the one you are looking at. It sounds
> strange to me, though.

Of the five responders so far [10:09 am EST], you're the only one who
recognizes the perfectly normal and understandable meaning. If you want,
say, to point out Vega (which, being circumpolar in our hemisphere, will
almost always be higher than most things in the sky), you could (if it
was in the right place) say: You see Venus, right there, near the horizon?
Just look up the sky to the bright star directly above it!

> There is also the verb phrase "to look up X", to search for (and often
> find) X" in a reference book. I include that for completeness, because
> there is not much context to go by.

That should have quotes around it, but Google ignores punctuation in
its searches.

And we mustn't forget "Look! Up in the sky! It's a bird! It's a plane!"

[Leslie Danks]

Peter T. Daniels wrote:

[...]

> And we mustn't forget "Look! Up in the sky! It's a bird! It's a plane!"

"Is it a bird? Is it a plane?" Shirley:

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U01xasUtlvw>

--
Les (BrE)

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

On Fri, 08 Nov 2013 19:20:49 +0100, Leslie Danks <leslie...@aon.at>
wrote:

>Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
>[...]
>
>> And we mustn't forget "Look! Up in the sky! It's a bird! It's a plane!"
>
>"Is it a bird? Is it a plane?" Shirley:
>

No Shirley. I think PTD is right.

http://www.tv.com/shows/adventures-of-superman/

Adventures of Superman
(ended 1958)

Announcer: "The Adventures of Superman" Faster than a speeding
bullet! More powerful than a locomotive! Able to leap tall buildings
at a single bound! Voices: "Look up in the sky! It's a bird! It's a
plane! It's Superman!" Announcer: "Yes, it's Superman, strange
visitor from another planet who came to Earth with powers and
abilities far beyond those of mortal men. ..."


--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)

[Leslie Danks]

Yes, you're right. Apologies to PTD for doubting his knowledge of left-
pondian culture. However, I am not alone in making this mistake, for
example:

[q]
Is it a bird? Is it a plane? No, it's Superman and friends... painted on
Soviet war statue by the Banksy of Bulgaria
[/q]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2004814/Is-bird-Is-plane-No-Superman-fri
ends-painted-Soviet-statue-Banksy-Bulgar
ia.html

http://tinyurl.com/63cr383

A lot of other links not connected with the Real Thing use the same wording.
Could it be that the original "It's a bird. It's a plane." has been
copyrighted?

--
Les (BrE)

[Don Phillipson]

"Yurui Liu" <liuyur...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:2463799e-ce24-4fa7...@googlegroups.com...

> Which one is correct- look up the sky or look up at the sky?
> I found both on Google.

Because Google is unselective (as to editorial quality) it will
present as many linguistic errors as the pool of discourse offers.
You will find better linguistic examples in books, because they
are edited for quality and conformity with rules.

--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)

[Yurui Liu]

Peter T. Daniels於 2013年11月9日星期六UTC+8上午2時03分25秒寫道：

> On Friday, November 8, 2013 8:24:54 AM UTC-5, CDB wrote:
>
> > On 08/11/2013 8:18 AM, Yurui Liu wrote:
>
>
>
> > > Which one is correct- look up the sky or look up at the sky?
>
> > > I found both on Google.
>
> >
>
> > Usually the version with "at" which means that you're looking at the
>
> > sky, which is above you.
>
> >
>
> > The other version might have some use as an instruction to look into the
>
> > sky, but at a point higher than the one you are looking at. It sounds
>
> > strange to me, though.
>
>
>
> Of the five responders so far [10:09 am EST], you're the only one who
>
> recognizes the perfectly normal and understandable meaning. If you want,
>
> say, to point out Vega (which, being circumpolar in our hemisphere, will
>
> almost always be higher than most things in the sky), you could (if it
>
> was in the right place) say: You see Venus, right there, near the horizon?
>
> Just look up the sky to the bright star directly above it!

Could you give me a definition of 'up' in this sense?
Also, how would you define 'up' in 'the water got up her nose'?

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Friday, November 8, 2013 1:20:49 PM UTC-5, Leslie Danks wrote:
> Peter T. Daniels wrote:

> > And we mustn't forget "Look! Up in the sky! It's a bird! It's a plane!"
>
> "Is it a bird? Is it a plane?" Shirley:
>
> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U01xasUtlvw>

Uh -- no. Even Monty Python parodies are parodies of _something_.

But when a clip supposedly by M.P. turns out to be a Lady Gaga something,
I'm not going to look at it for even part of 3m09s to find out what you're
referring to.

[Peter T. Daniels]

No, it could be that the original is familiar to most people.

Is the question version used Leftpondianly?

Is it the Rightpondian "Play it again, Sam"?

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Saturday, November 9, 2013 6:45:14 AM UTC-5, Yurui Liu wrote:
> Peter T. Daniels於 2013年11月9日星期六UTC+8上午2時03分25秒寫道：
> > On Friday, November 8, 2013 8:24:54 AM UTC-5, CDB wrote:
> > > On 08/11/2013 8:18 AM, Yurui Liu wrote:

> > > > Which one is correct- look up the sky or look up at the sky?
> > > > I found both on Google.
>
> > > Usually the version with "at" which means that you're looking at the
> > > sky, which is above you.
>
> > > The other version might have some use as an instruction to look into the
> > > sky, but at a point higher than the one you are looking at. It sounds
> > > strange to me, though.
>
> > Of the five responders so far [10:09 am EST], you're the only one who
> > recognizes the perfectly normal and understandable meaning. If you want,
> > say, to point out Vega (which, being circumpolar in our hemisphere, will
> > almost always be higher than most things in the sky), you could (if it
> > was in the right place) say: You see Venus, right there, near the horizon?
> > Just look up the sky to the bright star directly above it!
>
> Could you give me a definition of 'up' in this sense?

Is 'in an upward direction' sufficient?

> Also, how would you define 'up' in 'the water got up her nose'?

Why is that puzzling? Are you not familiar with the configuration
of human noses?

[Leslie Danks]

Huh? WTF are you on about. I have been accused of many things in my time,
but your claiming that I would even dream of posting a clip of Ms Gaga to
this illustrious group really takes the muffin.

--
Les (BrE)

[Yurui Liu]

Peter T. Daniels於 2013年11月9日星期六UTC+8下午8時57分44秒寫道：

> On Saturday, November 9, 2013 6:45:14 AM UTC-5, Yurui Liu wrote:
>
> > Peter T. Daniels於 2013年11月9日星期六UTC+8上午2時03分25秒寫道：
>
> > > On Friday, November 8, 2013 8:24:54 AM UTC-5, CDB wrote:
>
> > > > On 08/11/2013 8:18 AM, Yurui Liu wrote:
>
>
>
> > > > > Which one is correct- look up the sky or look up at the sky?
>
> > > > > I found both on Google.
>
> >
>
> > > > Usually the version with "at" which means that you're looking at the
>
> > > > sky, which is above you.
>
> >
>
> > > > The other version might have some use as an instruction to look into the
>
> > > > sky, but at a point higher than the one you are looking at. It sounds
>
> > > > strange to me, though.
>
> >
>
> > > Of the five responders so far [10:09 am EST], you're the only one who
>
> > > recognizes the perfectly normal and understandable meaning. If you want,
>
> > > say, to point out Vega (which, being circumpolar in our hemisphere, will
>
> > > almost always be higher than most things in the sky), you could (if it
>
> > > was in the right place) say: You see Venus, right there, near the horizon?
>
> > > Just look up the sky to the bright star directly above it!
>
> >
>
> > Could you give me a definition of 'up' in this sense?
>
>
>
> Is 'in an upward direction' sufficient?

The definition would also describe the adverbial use of 'up',
as in 'he looked up at the sky', and thus cannot allow me to
determine when to use 'look up the sky' and 'look up at the sky'.

>
>
>
> > Also, how would you define 'up' in 'the water got up her nose'?
>
>
>
> Why is that puzzling? Are you not familiar with the configuration
>
> of human noses?

does the sentence mean the water reached the level of her nose?

[Leslie Danks]

A desultory browse through the Google hits for the question version shows
that they (almost) all originate from outside the USA. Perhaps the first
person to use this form was uncertain whether to write "its" or "it's" and
decided to go round the problem.

--
Les (BrE)

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

On Sat, 09 Nov 2013 14:35:13 +0100, Leslie Danks <leslie...@aon.at>

wrote:

>Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
>> On Friday, November 8, 2013 1:20:49 PM UTC-5, Leslie Danks wrote:
>>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>
>>> > And we mustn't forget "Look! Up in the sky! It's a bird! It's a plane!"
>>>
>>> "Is it a bird? Is it a plane?" Shirley:
>>>
>>> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U01xasUtlvw>
>>
>> Uh -- no. Even Monty Python parodies are parodies of _something_.
>>
>> But when a clip supposedly by M.P. turns out to be a Lady Gaga something,
>> I'm not going to look at it for even part of 3m09s to find out what you're
>> referring to.
>
>Huh? WTF are you on about. I have been accused of many things in my time,
>but your claiming that I would even dream of posting a clip of Ms Gaga to
>this illustrious group really takes the muffin.

If Lady Gaga is in that clip then she is very well disguised. I think it
is beyond even her skill to masquerade as a broken bicycle.

Perhpas PTD is mistaking Mr F G Superman for Lady G.

[Mike L]

On Sat, 9 Nov 2013 05:48:47 -0800 (PST), Yurui Liu
<liuyur...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Peter T. Daniels? 2013?11?9????UTC+8??8?57?44????

>> On Saturday, November 9, 2013 6:45:14 AM UTC-5, Yurui Liu wrote:
>>

>> > Peter T. Daniels? 2013?11?9????UTC+8??2?03?25????

That one needs "up to". "The water reached up to his knees, then to
his waist...he was already frightened before it had reached up to his
nose."

"Up his nose", however, is for when something enters the nostrils from
outside. "He repeatedly draws water up his nose and blows it out again
every morning." "Don't put your finger up your nose, you naughty boy!"
Or, in slang, "That man really gets up my nose", meaning "he seriously
irritates me".

--
Mike.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Saturday, November 9, 2013 8:35:13 AM UTC-5, Leslie Danks wrote:
> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > On Friday, November 8, 2013 1:20:49 PM UTC-5, Leslie Danks wrote:
> >> Peter T. Daniels wrote:

> >> > And we mustn't forget "Look! Up in the sky! It's a bird! It's a plane!"
>
> >> "Is it a bird? Is it a plane?" Shirley:
>
> >> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U01xasUtlvw>
>
> > Uh -- no. Even Monty Python parodies are parodies of _something_.
>
> > But when a clip supposedly by M.P. turns out to be a Lady Gaga something,
> > I'm not going to look at it for even part of 3m09s to find out what you're
> > referring to.
>
> Huh? WTF are you on about. I have been accused of many things in my time,
> but your claiming that I would even dream of posting a clip of Ms Gaga to
> this illustrious group really takes the muffin.

I mean I clicked your link, which led me to a YouTube video, and when
I clicked the "go" triangle in the middle of it, it started buffering
the scene and told me it was going to be something or other with Miss G.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Saturday, November 9, 2013 8:48:47 AM UTC-5, Yurui Liu wrote:
> Peter T. Daniels於 2013年11月9日星期六UTC+8下午8時57分44秒寫道：
> > On Saturday, November 9, 2013 6:45:14 AM UTC-5, Yurui Liu wrote:
> > > Peter T. Daniels於 2013年11月9日星期六UTC+8上午2時03分25秒寫道：
> > > > On Friday, November 8, 2013 8:24:54 AM UTC-5, CDB wrote:
> > > > > On 08/11/2013 8:18 AM, Yurui Liu wrote:

> > > > > > Which one is correct- look up the sky or look up at the sky?
> > > > > > I found both on Google.
> > > > > Usually the version with "at" which means that you're looking at the
> > > > > sky, which is above you.
>
> > > > > The other version might have some use as an instruction to look into the
> > > > > sky, but at a point higher than the one you are looking at. It sounds
> > > > > strange to me, though.
>
> > > > Of the five responders so far [10:09 am EST], you're the only one who
> > > > recognizes the perfectly normal and understandable meaning. If you want,
> > > > say, to point out Vega (which, being circumpolar in our hemisphere, will
> > > > almost always be higher than most things in the sky), you could (if it
> > > > was in the right place) say: You see Venus, right there, near the
> > > > horizon? Just look up the sky to the bright star directly above it!
>
> > > Could you give me a definition of 'up' in this sense?
>
> > Is 'in an upward direction' sufficient?
>
> The definition would also describe the adverbial use of 'up',
> as in 'he looked up at the sky', and thus cannot allow me to
> determine when to use 'look up the sky' and 'look up at the sky'.

If I want you to look at the sky and tilt your head up when you do so,
I will suggest that you look up at the sky.

If I want you to direct your gaze from closer to the horizon to closer
to the zenith in search of some astronomical phenomenon, I will suggest
that you look up the sky.

> > > Also, how would you define 'up' in 'the water got up her nose'?
>
> > Why is that puzzling? Are you not familiar with the configuration
> > of human noses?
> does the sentence mean the water reached the level of her nose?

Of course not! The water went _up_ her nose: up the inside of her nose.
If there was enough of it, she would have drowned.

[Peter T. Daniels]

That suggests that *The Adventures of Superman* wasn't widely syndicated
outside the USA (it was never a US network program) -- and that the question
version was circulated by some parodist in regions that didn't recognize it
as parody (or paraphrase).

[Leslie Danks]

Strange. When I click on the link (in my post) it leads to Monty P's "Bicyle
Repair Man", which starts automatically.

--
Les (BrE)

[Leslie Danks]

Just to be sure we're on the same wavelength, I'm talking about the question
version of the phrase alone.

--
Les (BrE)

[Yurui Liu]

Mike L於 2013年11月10日星期日UTC+8上午7時02分05秒寫道：

> On Sat, 9 Nov 2013 05:48:47 -0800 (PST), Yurui Liu

> >does the sentence mean the water reached the level of her nose?

>
> That one needs "up to". "The water reached up to his knees, then to
>
> his waist...he was already frightened before it had reached up to his
>
> nose."
>
>
>
> "Up his nose", however, is for when something enters the nostrils from
>
> outside. "He repeatedly draws water up his nose and blows it out again
>
> every morning." "Don't put your finger up your nose, you naughty boy!"
>
> Or, in slang, "That man really gets up my nose", meaning "he seriously
>
> irritates me".

It seems that 'up' means 'into something in an upward direction" in this
case. What does this use have in common with 'up' in 'he walked up the
ladder'? I want to generalize the prepositional use.




>
>
>
> --
>
> Mike.

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

On Sun, 10 Nov 2013 02:00:16 +0100, Leslie Danks <leslie...@aon.at>

Just the same for me.

[Ian Jackson]

In message <4a87e0e6-ffb6-4bf0...@googlegroups.com>,
Yurui Liu <liuyur...@gmail.com> writes
>Mike L0 >> On Sat, 9 Nov 2013 05:48:47 -0800 (PST), Yurui Liu

You cannot always generalise "up" (or down, sideways, left, right etc).

"Up" is normally only associated with "into something" when you are
looking "into" something - and it usually indicates an upwards
direction. However, if the naughty boy was lying down, you would still
say "Don't put your finger up your nose" - even though the direction of
his finger would probably be downwards. Similarly, you would say "Don't
put your fingers down your throat" (even if he was standing on his
head).

In the case of a ladder, you would normally "climb up" (= ascend) a
ladder, or "climb down" (descend) a ladder. [Note that "climb a ladder"
usually means "climb up a ladder".] Of course, you could "walk into a
ladder", but this means that you were walking along, presumably not
looking where you were going - and accidentally collided with ladder
that was standing against a wall.
--
Ian

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

On Sat, 9 Nov 2013 16:01:33 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"
<gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

>On Saturday, November 9, 2013 8:48:47 AM UTC-5, Yurui Liu wrote:

>> Peter T. Daniels? 2013?11?9????UTC+8??8?57?44????

>> > On Saturday, November 9, 2013 6:45:14 AM UTC-5, Yurui Liu wrote:

>> > > Peter T. Daniels? 2013?11?9????UTC+8??2?03?25????

I'd make the instruction clearer by saying "higher up (in) the sky".

>> > > Also, how would you define 'up' in 'the water got up her nose'?
>>
>> > Why is that puzzling? Are you not familiar with the configuration
>> > of human noses?
>> does the sentence mean the water reached the level of her nose?
>
>Of course not! The water went _up_ her nose: up the inside of her nose.
>If there was enough of it, she would have drowned.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Sunday, November 10, 2013 5:54:37 AM UTC-5, PeterWD wrote:
> On Sat, 9 Nov 2013 16:01:33 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"
> <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

> >If I want you to direct your gaze from closer to the horizon to closer
> >to the zenith in search of some astronomical phenomenon, I will suggest
> >that you look up the sky.
>
> I'd make the instruction clearer by saying "higher up (in) the sky".

Lest your interlocutor look lower up the sky?

(Ooh, didn't someone just claim no one says "lest" any more?)

[Ian Noble]

On Fri, 8 Nov 2013 10:03:25 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"
<gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

>On Friday, November 8, 2013 8:24:54 AM UTC-5, CDB wrote:
>> On 08/11/2013 8:18 AM, Yurui Liu wrote:
>
>> > Which one is correct- look up the sky or look up at the sky?
>> > I found both on Google.
>>
>> Usually the version with "at" which means that you're looking at the
>> sky, which is above you.
>>
>> The other version might have some use as an instruction to look into the
>> sky, but at a point higher than the one you are looking at. It sounds
>> strange to me, though.
>
>Of the five responders so far [10:09 am EST], you're the only one who
>recognizes the perfectly normal and understandable meaning. If you want,
>say, to point out Vega (which, being circumpolar in our hemisphere, will
>almost always be higher than most things in the sky), you could (if it
>was in the right place) say: You see Venus, right there, near the horizon?
>Just look up the sky to the bright star directly above it!
>

There's also a generic formation,
"Look (direction through or into) the (something with an apperture)".

So, "Look out the window", "Look down the stairwell", "Look up the
chimney", "Look in the box", and so on.

But "Look up the sky" doesn't work for me in that sense.

Cheers - Ian
(BrE: Yorks., Hants.)

[Ian Jackson]

In message <2u3189pm1rfv86j2g...@4ax.com>, Ian Noble
<ipn...@killspam.o2.co.uk> writes

>


>There's also a generic formation,
>"Look (direction through or into) the (something with an apperture)".
>
>So, "Look out the window", "Look down the stairwell", "Look up the
>chimney", "Look in the box", and so on.
>
>But "Look up the sky" doesn't work for me in that sense.
>
>Cheers - Ian
>(BrE: Yorks., Hants.)

Normal BrE tends to be "look out OF the window". However, "look out"
alone can be found in certain songs. I think it is essentially an
AmE-ism.
--
Ian

[Nick Spalding]

Ian Jackson wrote, in <Waky+fDk...@g3ohx.demon.co.uk>
on Mon, 11 Nov 2013 09:46:12 +0000:

Also heard in IrE.
--
Nick Spalding
BrE/IrE

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Monday, November 11, 2013 4:46:12 AM UTC-5, Ian Jackson wrote:
> In message <2u3189pm1rfv86j2g...@4ax.com>, Ian Noble
> <ipn...@killspam.o2.co.uk> writes

> >There's also a generic formation,
> >"Look (direction through or into) the (something with an apperture)".
> >So, "Look out the window", "Look down the stairwell", "Look up the
> >chimney", "Look in the box", and so on.
> >But "Look up the sky" doesn't work for me in that sense.

Agreed.

> Normal BrE tends to be "look out OF the window". However, "look out"
> alone can be found in certain songs. I think it is essentially an
> AmE-ism.

It's often found in AmE but I detest double-prepositions.

I still have my 4th-grade arithmetic textbook in which I wrote (at Sr.
Hilary's direction) the instructions for putting numbers into words.
We were taught not to use "and" before the units -- whereas it seems
to be entirely wrong (or "vulgar"?) in BrE to write/say "four hundred
five" rather than "four hundred and five."

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Monday, November 11, 2013 4:46:12 AM UTC-5, Ian Jackson wrote:

> In message <2u3189pm1rfv86j2g...@4ax.com>, Ian Noble
> <ipn...@killspam.o2.co.uk> writes

> >There's also a generic formation,
> >"Look (direction through or into) the (something with an apperture)".
> >So, "Look out the window", "Look down the stairwell", "Look up the
> >chimney", "Look in the box", and so on.
> >But "Look up the sky" doesn't work for me in that sense.

Agreed.

> Normal BrE tends to be "look out OF the window". However, "look out"
> alone can be found in certain songs. I think it is essentially an
> AmE-ism.

[Leslie Danks]

Peter T. Daniels wrote:

[...] (twice)

Your posts have started appearing double and I don't think it's my eyes.

--
Les (BrE)

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Monday, November 11, 2013 9:21:27 AM UTC-5, Leslie Danks wrote:
> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
>
>
> [...] (twice)
>
>
>
> Your posts have started appearing double and I don't think it's my eyes.

If it tells me "There has been an error and your reply has not been posted.
Try again in a few minutes" [or words to that effect], then I try again in
a few seconds, and sometimes it goes through (what turns out to be again).
Apparently it lies to me the first time.

OTOH, usually when it gives that message, it seems to mean what in the olden
days it referred to as "the Google posting limit," which was completely
undefined, and when one reaches that (I can't even tell whether it's based
on number of messages or total number of lines posted), one has to wait
two to three hours (and then one can post the message or two that one saved
in Notepad).

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

I'm not sure about "entirely wrong" or "vulgar". It is *customary* to
use "and" between the hundreds-and-above and the less-than-one-hundred
portion. This can be nested.

Thus the longest spoken version of 806,365,475 is:

eight hundred and six million, three hundred and sixty five thousand,
and four hundred and seventy five.

There are shorter ways of speaking that number.
For instance:

eight oh six million, three six five thousand and four seven five

or just rattling off the digits without any mention of millions and
thousands.

It all depends what is customary in any given context.

[Leslie Danks]

It seems now to have reverted to normal.
<sotto voce> Why don't you try a proper newsreader?

--
Les (BrE)

[Jenn]

You might try using a different application for accessing newsgroups.
Mesnews is a free choice some people like.

--
Jenn

[Mike L]

On Mon, 11 Nov 2013 13:28:46 +0000, Nick Spalding <spal...@iol.ie>
wrote:

I'd have said "look out the..." was absolutely normal colloquial usage
in all varieties of English, though I'd always use "of" in writing. My
speech probably varies.

--
Mike.

[Evan Kirshenbaum]

"Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> writes:

> And we mustn't forget "Look! Up in the sky! It's a bird! It's a
> plane!"

"It's a frog!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=pNiTs0-dOxU#t=250

--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
Still with HP Labs |"Revolution" has many definitions.
SF Bay Area (1982-) |From the looks of this, I'd say
Chicago (1964-1982) |"going around in circles" comes
|closest to applying...
evan.kir...@gmail.com | Richard M. Hartman

http://www.kirshenbaum.net/

[an...@alum.wpi.edi]

On Mon, 11 Nov 2013 13:28:46 +0000, Nick Spalding <spal...@iol.ie>
wrote:

Little Miss Muffet
Sat on a tuffet,
Eating her curds and whey.
Along came a spider,
Who sat down beside her,
And threw her out the window.

ANMcC

[Leslie Danks]

Here we are again - cartoon in today's Guardian:

<http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2013/11/11/1384208385898/Steve-Bell-12.11.13-002.jpg>

(For anyone not au fait with UK politics, the flying object is former
British Prime Minister John Major.)

--
Les (BrE)

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 2:06:30 AM UTC-5, Evan Kirshenbaum wrote:
> "Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> writes:

> > And we mustn't forget "Look! Up in the sky! It's a bird! It's a
> > plane!"
>
> "It's a frog!"
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=pNiTs0-dOxU#t=250

Underdog was after my time, but note that (presumably for copyright
reasons) they changed the wording a bit.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 3:53:02 AM UTC-5, Leslie Danks wrote:

> Leslie Danks wrote:

> > Just to be sure we're on the same wavelength, I'm talking about the
> > question version of the phrase alone.

Yes -- the inauthentic version.

> Here we are again - cartoon in today's Guardian:

> <http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2013/11/11/1384208385898/Steve-Bell-12.11.13-002.jpg>

> (For anyone not au fait with UK politics, the flying object is former
> British Prime Minister John Major.)

Ok, but what is "ordinary oik"?

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

Oik:
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/oik

British informal

an uncouth or obnoxious person.

I think that is a bit strong in the context of the cartoon.
Something like "ordinary uncouth guy", where the uncouthness is moderate
to mild, might be closer.

[John Briggs]

A pleonasm?
--
John Briggs

[Evan Kirshenbaum]

"Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> writes:

> On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 2:06:30 AM UTC-5, Evan Kirshenbaum wrote:
>> "Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> writes:
>
>> > And we mustn't forget "Look! Up in the sky! It's a bird! It's a
>> > plane!"
>>
>> "It's a frog!"
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=pNiTs0-dOxU#t=250
>
> Underdog was after my time, but note that (presumably for copyright
> reasons) they changed the wording a bit.

I looked at a couple of instances on YouTube (it was a running gag at
the end of every story) and the wording wasn't consistent.

--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
Still with HP Labs |On a scale of one to ten...
SF Bay Area (1982-) |it sucked.
Chicago (1964-1982)

evan.kir...@gmail.com

http://www.kirshenbaum.net/

[Jenn]

That must have been one big freaky spider!

--
Jenn

[Jerry Friedman]

On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 1:02:11 AM UTC-7, an...@alum.wpi.edi wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Nov 2013 13:28:46 +0000, Nick Spalding <spal...@iol.ie>
> wrote:
> >Ian Jackson wrote, in <Waky+fDk...@g3ohx.demon.co.uk>

...

> >> Normal BrE tends to be "look out OF the window". However, "look out"
> >> alone can be found in certain songs. I think it is essentially an
> >> AmE-ism.
>
> >Also heard in IrE.
>
> Little Miss Muffet
> Sat on a tuffet,
> Eating her curds and whey.
> Along came a spider,
> Who sat down beside her,
> And threw her out the window.

The window,
The window,
The second-stooory window.

(I forget the rest. No doubt it's at the Mudcat or someplace.)

--
Jerry Friedman

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 11:36:02 AM UTC-5, Evan Kirshenbaum wrote:
> "Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> writes:

> > Underdog was after my time, but note that (presumably for copyright
> > reasons) they changed the wording a bit.
> I looked at a couple of instances on YouTube (it was a running gag at
> the end of every story) and the wording wasn't consistent.

Was it ever identical to the *Adventures of Superman* original?

[Mike L]

It means a person of lower social class than the Cameron crowd, and
yes, at least moderately uncouth. John Major was regarded as
frightfully not-quite-our-class-dear by leading members of his party;
he didn't much care, and genuinely did feel he was standing up for
ordinary people in his political life, even if it didn't work out that
way. Hence comments from the ground in the picture. (Who is the black
one?)

Steve Bell and his cartoons are the only things I miss about the
Guardian.

--
Mike.

[Evan Kirshenbaum]

"Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> writes:

> On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 11:36:02 AM UTC-5, Evan Kirshenbaum wrote:
>> "Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> writes:
>
>> > Underdog was after my time, but note that (presumably for copyright
>> > reasons) they changed the wording a bit.
>> I looked at a couple of instances on YouTube (it was a running gag at
>> the end of every story) and the wording wasn't consistent.
>
> Was it ever identical to the *Adventures of Superman* original?

Don't know. Probably. Was the _Adventures of Superman_ version the
same every episode?

--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
Still with HP Labs |A specification which calls for
SF Bay Area (1982-) |network-wide use of encryption, but
Chicago (1964-1982) |invokes the Tooth Fairy to handle
|key distribution, is a useless
evan.kir...@gmail.com |farce.
| Henry Spencer
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/

[Evan Kirshenbaum]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vt1AdH2LMcU

On the album I have, when Keith sings "Rub a Dub Dub, Three Men in a
Tub", Ezra sings "Stairway to Heaven" ("A massively popular and
financially lucrative nursery rhyme from the 1970s").

--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
Still with HP Labs |If I may digress momentarily from
SF Bay Area (1982-) |the mainstream of this evening's
Chicago (1964-1982) |symposium, I'd like to sing a song
|which is completely pointless.
evan.kir...@gmail.com | Tom Lehrer

http://www.kirshenbaum.net/

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 8:07:08 PM UTC-5, Evan Kirshenbaum wrote:
> "Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> writes:
> > On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 11:36:02 AM UTC-5, Evan Kirshenbaum wrote:
> >> "Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> writes:

> >> > Underdog was after my time, but note that (presumably for copyright
> >> > reasons) they changed the wording a bit.
> >> I looked at a couple of instances on YouTube (it was a running gag at
> >> the end of every story) and the wording wasn't consistent.
>
> > Was it ever identical to the *Adventures of Superman* original?
>
> Don't know. Probably. Was the _Adventures of Superman_ version the
> same every episode?

Of course. It was the stock opening. It never occurred during a story.

[Evan Kirshenbaum]

But it would've been performed live each time (we are talking about
the radio show, right?), so it wasn't clear that it never varied.
Checking Wikipedia, it appeared that it did morph:

... the most oft heard radio opening through the mid-1940s was:

"Presenting the transcription feature, Superman." (followed by
Superman's "flying" audio effect)
Up in the sky! Look!

It's a bird!
It's a plane!

It's Superman!

"Yes, it's Superman--strange visitor from the planet Krypton who

came to Earth with powers and abilities far beyond those of mortal

men. Superman, who can leap tall buildings in a single bound, race
a speeding bullet to its target, bend steel in his bare hands, and
who, disguised as Clark Kent, mild-mannered reporter for a great
Metropolitan newspaper, fights a never-ending battle for truth and
justice."

By September 5, 1945, the opening, (repeated at the close), had
morphed into:

"Faster than a speeding bullet. More powerful than a
locomotive. Able to leap tall buildings in a single bound.'

Look! Up in the sky!
It's a bird!
It's a plane!

It's Superman!"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Adventures_of_Superman_%28radio%29

--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
Still with HP Labs |Never ascribe to malice that which
SF Bay Area (1982-) |can adequately be explained by
Chicago (1964-1982) |stupidity.

evan.kir...@gmail.com

http://www.kirshenbaum.net/

[Evan Kirshenbaum]

FWIW, I have the first episode (2/12/1940), and the opening is

Boys and girls, you're attention, please! Presenting a new and
exciting radio program featuring the thrilling adventures of an
amazing and incredible personality. Faster than an airplane!
More powerful than a locomotive! Impervious to bullets!

"Up in the sky! Look! It's a bird!"
"It's a plane!"
"It's Superman!"

And now, Superman, a being no larger than an ordinary man, but
possessed of powers and abilities never before realized on Earth:
able to leap into the air an eighth of a mile at a single bound,
hurtle a twenty-storey building with ease, race a high-powered
bullet to its target, lift tremendous weights and rend solid steel
in his bare hands as though it were paper. Superman! A strange
visitor from a distant planet, champion of the oppressed, physical
marvel extraordinary, who has sworn to devote his existence on
Earth to helping those in need.

By the second episode it was

Presenting, Superman!

"Up in the sky! Look!"
"It's a bird!"
"It's a plane!"
"It's Superman!"

And now, Superman, eighth wonder of the modern world, a visitor
from a distant planet whose strength knows no limit, whose
endurance is beyond anything humanity has ever known.

The third episode changed the wording of the description slightly, and
by the fourth, it the paragraph had been reduced to "And now, Superman".

--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
Still with HP Labs |The Society for the Preservation of
SF Bay Area (1982-) |Tithesis commends your ebriated and
Chicago (1964-1982) |scrutable use of delible and
|defatigable, which are gainly, sipid
evan.kir...@gmail.com |and couth. We are gruntled and
|consolate that you have the ertia and
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ |eptitude to choose such putably
|pensible tithesis, which we parage.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Wednesday, November 13, 2013 12:13:16 PM UTC-5, Evan Kirshenbaum wrote:
> "Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> writes:
> > On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 8:07:08 PM UTC-5, Evan Kirshenbaum wrote:
> >> "Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> writes:
> >> > On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 11:36:02 AM UTC-5, Evan Kirshenbaum wrote:
> >> >> "Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> writes:

> >> >> > Underdog was after my time, but note that (presumably for copyright
> >> >> > reasons) they changed the wording a bit.
> >> >> I looked at a couple of instances on YouTube (it was a running gag at
> >> >> the end of every story) and the wording wasn't consistent.
> >> > Was it ever identical to the *Adventures of Superman* original?
> >> Don't know. Probably. Was the _Adventures of Superman_ version
> >> the same every episode?
> > Of course. It was the stock opening. It never occurred during a
> > story.
>
> But it would've been performed live each time (we are talking about
> the radio show, right?), so it wasn't clear that it never varied.
> Checking Wikipedia, it appeared that it did morph:

My god! What in the _entire preceding discussion_ could possibly have
led you to imagine that "we" (inclusive) were talking about a _radio_
version??

[R H Draney]

Evan Kirshenbaum filted:

>
>FWIW, I have the first episode (2/12/1940), and the opening is
>
> Boys and girls, you're attention, please!

Whom shall I "Oy!"?...r


--
Me? Sarcastic?
Yeah, right.

[Rich Ulrich]

On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 09:13:16 -0800, Evan Kirshenbaum
<evan.kir...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Superman, on radio, 1940s]

> ... the most oft heard radio opening through the mid-1940s was:
>

...

> "Yes, it's Superman--strange visitor from the planet Krypton who
> came to Earth with powers and abilities far beyond those of mortal
> men. Superman, who can leap tall buildings in a single bound, race
> a speeding bullet to its target, bend steel in his bare hands, and
> who, disguised as Clark Kent, mild-mannered reporter for a great
> Metropolitan newspaper, fights a never-ending battle for truth and
> justice."

Parse that. Doesn't it attribute the "battle for truth and
justice" to the Clark Kent persona?

If that is different from what was on tv, I can't tell.


--
Rich Ulrich

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Wednesday, November 13, 2013 5:27:47 PM UTC-5, Rich Ulrich wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 09:13:16 -0800, Evan Kirshenbaum
> <evan.kir...@gmail.com> wrote:

> [Superman, on radio, 1940s]
>
> > ... the most oft heard radio opening through the mid-1940s was:.
>

> > "Yes, it's Superman--strange visitor from the planet Krypton who
> > came to Earth with powers and abilities far beyond those of mortal
> > men. Superman, who can leap tall buildings in a single bound, race
> > a speeding bullet to its target, bend steel in his bare hands, and
> > who, disguised as Clark Kent, mild-mannered reporter for a great
> > Metropolitan newspaper, fights a never-ending battle for truth and
> > justice."
>
> Parse that. Doesn't it attribute the "battle for truth and
> justice" to the Clark Kent persona?
>
> If that is different from what was on tv, I can't tell.

I'll try to do the TV version without looking at the radio version that's
scrolled up out of the window.

Look! Up in the sky! It's a bird! It's a plane! It's Superman!

... faster than a speeding bullet ... able to leap tall buildings
in a single bound ... Strange visitor from another planet, who came
to earth with powers and abilities far beyond those of mortal men ...

and who, disguised as Clark Kent, mild-mannered reporter for a great metropolitan newspaper, fights a never-ending battle for Truth, Justice,
and the American Way!

Now scroll back up for the comparison ...

yes, "bend steel in his bare hands" should be in there but I'm not
sure of the position or the syntax. But as for the rest of it, I'm
certain of the divergences. (Must've seen it every day from the ages
of about 5 to 8 or 10. There's an elaborate DVD set of all sorts of
pre-Chris Reeve Superman versions, including the 1940? Max Fleischer
animated feature, but it doesn't include the complete run of the TV
series so I'm reluctant to buy it, as surely the series will be issued
on its own.

Have I mentioned that I knew Chris Reeve at Cornell? He was no
Superman -- he was tall and skinny -- but the only time I saw
him in a play he was the fellow in *Waiting for Godot* with the
whip. Already quite powerful. He quit after his 2nd or 3rd year
to appear opposite Katharine Hepburn in *A Matter of Gravity*.
Didn't put on the muscle until after he was cast as Superman.

But my favorite version is *Lois and Clark* (Teri Hatcher and
Dean Cain respectively; he hasn't been much heard of since.
Occasional guest appearances, and I think he was a recurring
character in the Hercules / Xena franchise.)

[Evan Kirshenbaum]

R H Draney <dado...@spamcop.net> writes:

> Evan Kirshenbaum filted:
>>
>>FWIW, I have the first episode (2/12/1940), and the opening is
>>
>> Boys and girls, you're attention, please!
>
> Whom shall I "Oy!"?...r

That would be me. I presume they got it right on the script.

--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
Still with HP Labs |Well, if you can't believe what you
SF Bay Area (1982-) |read in a comic book, what can you
Chicago (1964-1982) |believe?!
| Bullwinkle J. Moose
evan.kir...@gmail.com

http://www.kirshenbaum.net/

[Evan Kirshenbaum]

I suspect that it was your use of the phrase "_Adventures of Superman_
original", specifically the use of the word "original", that led me to
assume that you were referring to the 1940 radio serial called _The
Adventures of Superman_, which was, I believe, where the wording first
showed up (in, as you said, the opening rather than the story), rather
than to some later version, such as the 1952 TV series of the same
name with George Reeves or even the 1941 Fleischer cartoons (called
just _Superman_).

(For what it's worth, the TV show had "Look! Up in the sky!", while
the earlier cartoons had "Up in the sky! Look!".)

If you didn't mean the _Adventures of Superman_ original, you probably
should've used different words.

--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
Still with HP Labs |The reason that we don't have
SF Bay Area (1982-) |"bear-proof" garbage cans in the
Chicago (1964-1982) |park is that there is a significant
|overlap in intelligence between the
evan.kir...@gmail.com |smartest bears and the dumbest
|humans.
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ | Yosemite Park Ranger

[Evan Kirshenbaum]

No:

Superman,

[who can leap tall buildings in a single bound, race a speeding

bullet to its target, bend steel in his bare hands, and]

who

[, disguised as Clark Kent, mild-mannered reporter for a great

Metropolitan newspaper,]

fights a never-ending battle for truth and justice.

> If that is different from what was on tv, I can't tell.

--

Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
Still with HP Labs |The purpose of writing is to inflate
SF Bay Area (1982-) |weak ideas, obscure poor reasoning,
Chicago (1964-1982) |and inhibit clarity. With a little
|practice, writing can be an
evan.kir...@gmail.com |intimidating and impenetrable fog!
| Calvin
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Thursday, November 14, 2013 4:45:38 PM UTC-5, Evan Kirshenbaum wrote:
> Rich Ulrich <rich....@comcast.net> writes:
> > On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 09:13:16 -0800, Evan Kirshenbaum
> > <evan.kir...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > [Superman, on radio, 1940s]
> >> ... the most oft heard radio opening through the mid-1940s was:

> >> "Yes, it's Superman--strange visitor from the planet Krypton who
> >> came to Earth with powers and abilities far beyond those of
> >> mortal men. Superman, who can leap tall buildings in a single
> >> bound, race a speeding bullet to its target, bend steel in his
> >> bare hands, and who, disguised as Clark Kent, mild-mannered
> >> reporter for a great Metropolitan newspaper, fights a
> >> never-ending battle for truth and justice."
> > Parse that. Doesn't it attribute the "battle for truth and justice"
> > to the Clark Kent persona?
> No:
> Superman,
> [who can leap tall buildings in a single bound, race a speeding
> bullet to its target, bend steel in his bare hands, and]
> who
> [, disguised as Clark Kent, mild-mannered reporter for a great
> Metropolitan newspaper,]
> fights a never-ending battle for truth and justice.
> > If that is different from what was on tv, I can't tell.

The voice-over announcer's voice changes drastically at "And who, ..."
making it quite clear that it is Kent who is the patriotic crusader.

The TV series is called "The Adventures of Superman." I would be surprised
if episodes of a prior radio series survive, because for all the years I
listened to Chuck Schaden on Saturday afternoon instead of the Metropolitan
Opera, I'm pretty sure he never once played a "Superman" show.

[Evan Kirshenbaum]

"Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> writes:

As was the radio show.

> I would be surprised if episodes of a prior radio series survive,
> because for all the years I listened to Chuck Schaden on Saturday
> afternoon instead of the Metropolitan Opera, I'm pretty sure he
> never once played a "Superman" show.

You may be surprised, for that reason or some other, but some
1,100-odd episodes (4.6 GB) running from 2/12/1940 through 1/23/1950
were posted to alt.binaries.sounds.radio.oldtime about three years
ago. I only grabbed the first half dozen. My transcripts were made
by listening to the episodes.

--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
Still with HP Labs |If I am ever forced to make a
SF Bay Area (1982-) |choice between learning and using
Chicago (1964-1982) |win32, or leaving the computer
|industry, let me just say it was
evan.kir...@gmail.com |nice knowing all of you. :-)
| Randal Schwartz
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/

[Mike L]

I very vaguely remember the radio show, but only an episode which,
strangely, also included Batman. I can't remember why, but Batman had
to stand on a tall building and pretend to be Superman. For some
reason the crowd below didn't believe him, and one man cried out "Then
fly, and prove it!" The cliff-hanger ran "Batman can't fly! Tune in
again..."

--
Mike.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Friday, November 15, 2013 2:42:43 PM UTC-5, Mike L wrote:

> I very vaguely remember the radio show, but only an episode which,
> strangely, also included Batman. I can't remember why, but Batman had
> to stand on a tall building and pretend to be Superman. For some
> reason the crowd below didn't believe him, and one man cried out "Then
> fly, and prove it!" The cliff-hanger ran "Batman can't fly! Tune in
> again..."

Originally, Superman didn't fly, either. He was "able to leap tall
buildings at a single bound."

[Mark Brader]

Evan Kirshenbaum quotes the Superman radio show:

> > "Yes, it's Superman--strange visitor from the planet Krypton who
> > came to Earth with powers and abilities far beyond those of mortal
> > men. Superman, who can leap tall buildings in a single bound, race
> > a speeding bullet to its target, bend steel in his bare hands, and
> > who, disguised as Clark Kent, mild-mannered reporter for a great
> > Metropolitan newspaper, fights a never-ending battle for truth and
> > justice."

Rich Ulrich:

> If that is different from what was on tv, I can't tell.

It certainly is. It doesn't end with "and the American way", and more
important, it doesn't say that he's "more powerful than a locomotive"!
--
Mark Brader, Toronto Rocket, 1829: The first 30 mph train.
m...@vex.net TGV-A, 1989: The first 300 mph train.

[R H Draney]

Peter T. Daniels filted:

>
>Originally, Superman didn't fly, either. He was "able to leap tall
>buildings at a single bound."

FSVO "originally"...the first version said:

"...he discovered he could easily: leap 1/8th of a mile; hurdle a twenty-story
building...raise tremendous weights...run faster than an express train...and
that nothing less than a bursting shell could penetrate his skin!"

In the first few appearances, Superman also had a power that was later dropped:
he could reshape the molecules of his face to make him look like anyone he
wished....r

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Friday, November 15, 2013 9:53:39 PM UTC-5, R H Draney wrote:
> Peter T. Daniels filted:

> >Originally, Superman didn't fly, either. He was "able to leap tall
> >buildings at a single bound."
>
> FSVO "originally"...the first version said:

Meaning the first comic book?

> "...he discovered he could easily: leap 1/8th of a mile; hurdle a twenty-story
> building...raise tremendous weights...run faster than an express train...and
> that nothing less than a bursting shell could penetrate his skin!"

In the "Secret Origins" story, ISTR he wasn't drafted into WWII because they
couldn't give him his shots -- the needles kept bending against his skin.
The orderly (nurse?) muttered "What the-- ?"

[Mike L]

On Fri, 15 Nov 2013 19:55:57 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"
<gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

>On Friday, November 15, 2013 9:53:39 PM UTC-5, R H Draney wrote:
>> Peter T. Daniels filted:
>
>> >Originally, Superman didn't fly, either. He was "able to leap tall
>> >buildings at a single bound."
>>
>> FSVO "originally"...the first version said:
>
>Meaning the first comic book?
>
>> "...he discovered he could easily: leap 1/8th of a mile; hurdle a twenty-story
>> building...raise tremendous weights...run faster than an express train...and
>> that nothing less than a bursting shell could penetrate his skin!"
>
>In the "Secret Origins" story, ISTR he wasn't drafted into WWII because they
>couldn't give him his shots -- the needles kept bending against his skin.
>The orderly (nurse?) muttered "What the-- ?"

Tarzan, on the other hand and if I remember correctly, became a
much-decorated Squadron Leader in the RAF.

Come to that, W.E.Johns didn't; but he was a successful gardening
writer.

>
>> In the first few appearances, Superman also had a power that was later dropped:
>> he could reshape the molecules of his face to make him look like anyone he
>> wished....r

I suppose they decided that would be too complicated for the audience
to keep up with.

--
Mike.

[John Briggs]

On 16/11/2013 20:52, Mike L wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Nov 2013 19:55:57 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"
> <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>> On Friday, November 15, 2013 9:53:39 PM UTC-5, R H Draney wrote:
>>> Peter T. Daniels filted:
>>
>>>> Originally, Superman didn't fly, either. He was "able to leap tall
>>>> buildings at a single bound."
>>>
>>> FSVO "originally"...the first version said:
>>
>> Meaning the first comic book?
>>
>>> "...he discovered he could easily: leap 1/8th of a mile; hurdle a twenty-story
>>> building...raise tremendous weights...run faster than an express train...and
>>> that nothing less than a bursting shell could penetrate his skin!"
>>
>> In the "Secret Origins" story, ISTR he wasn't drafted into WWII because they
>> couldn't give him his shots -- the needles kept bending against his skin.
>> The orderly (nurse?) muttered "What the-- ?"
>
> Tarzan, on the other hand and if I remember correctly, became a
> much-decorated Squadron Leader in the RAF.
>
> Come to that, W.E.Johns didn't; but he was a successful gardening
> writer.

He got to the rank of Flying Officer. He sems to have written one
gardening book...
--
John Briggs

[Dr Nick]

I'm pretty sure he was even referred to as Flying Officer on the covers
of the books.

[Mike L]

According to a piece in _The Garden_ some years ago, he wrote articles
on the subject.

>
>I'm pretty sure he was even referred to as Flying Officer on the covers
>of the books.

"Captain" is the handle he has in _Biggles, Pioneer Air Fighter_,
which is the only one I have. But of course he wasn't one.

--
Mike.

[Dr Nick]

You're right - I misremembered. I've found plenty of dust jacket images
to back you up.

[Ian Noble]

On Mon, 11 Nov 2013 09:46:12 +0000, Ian Jackson
<ianREMOVET...@g3ohx.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>In message <2u3189pm1rfv86j2g...@4ax.com>, Ian Noble
><ipn...@killspam.o2.co.uk> writes
>>
>
>
>>There's also a generic formation,
>>"Look (direction through or into) the (something with an apperture)".
>>
>>So, "Look out the window", "Look down the stairwell", "Look up the
>>chimney", "Look in the box", and so on.
>>
>>But "Look up the sky" doesn't work for me in that sense.
>>
>>Cheers - Ian
>>(BrE: Yorks., Hants.)

>
>Normal BrE tends to be "look out OF the window". However, "look out"
>alone can be found in certain songs. I think it is essentially an
>AmE-ism.

Far too late to greatly add to this thread (I've been busy with family
stuff - my apologies). But I feel the need to say that I can't agree.
I'm wholely UK born and bred, and whilst I recognise (and might well
even say) "look out OF the window", I am more likely to use the
shorter version. As such, in my book at least, it is also "normal
BrE".

If pressed, I'd take a wild guess (as with most such things) that I
picked up the supposedly-"non-standard" variant in my youth in the
West Riding.

Cheers - Ian
(BrE: Yorks., Hants.)

[Steve Hayes]

From Wikipedia:

William Earl Johns (5 February 1893 – 21 June 1968) was an English pilot and
writer of adventure stories, usually written under the pen name Captain W. E.
Johns although he never held that rank. He is best remembered as the creator
of the ace pilot and adventurer Biggles.


--
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

[Dr Nick]

Yes Steve I know. I apologised for my mistake the best part of a good
month ago.

[Steve Hayes]

On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 07:30:34 +0000, Dr Nick

And I wrote that over a month ago, before you did so, but for some reason the
post did not go out.

It must have gone out this morning when I resent some more recent messages
that had not gone out.

[Tony Cooper]

On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 10:07:21 +0200, Steve Hayes
<haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote:

>It must have gone out this morning when I resent

One of the words that should be hyphenated for clarity. The first
reading makes me wonder why you are angry at the recent messages.

>some more recent messages that had not gone out.
--

Tony Cooper - Orlando FL