Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Hackney-eyed
62 views
Skip to first unread message
Guy Barry
Jul 29, 2012, 3:11:09 AM7/29/12
to
A British Conservative MP has been in the media criticizing the Olympic
opening ceremony. One of the adjectives he used to describe it was
"hackney-eyed". Presumably he had read the word "hackneyed" but never heard
it, and falsely assumed that the last four letters formed a separate word
(although that wouldn't explain the extra syllable).
Or perhaps he was thinking of "cock-eyed". Or perhaps he was confused by
the fact that the Olympic site is close to Hackney in east London.
--
Guy Barry
opening ceremony. One of the adjectives he used to describe it was
"hackney-eyed". Presumably he had read the word "hackneyed" but never heard
it, and falsely assumed that the last four letters formed a separate word
(although that wouldn't explain the extra syllable).
Or perhaps he was thinking of "cock-eyed". Or perhaps he was confused by
the fact that the Olympic site is close to Hackney in east London.
--
Guy Barry
M Winther
Jul 29, 2012, 4:58:00 AM7/29/12
to
"Guy Barry" <guy....@blueyonder.co.uk> skrev i meddelandet
news:Qn5Rr.873776$jg3.7...@fx23.am4...
Even I knew this adjective.
Mats
news:Qn5Rr.873776$jg3.7...@fx23.am4...
Mats
Guy Barry
Jul 29, 2012, 5:28:11 AM7/29/12
to
"M Winther" <ml...@swipnet.se> wrote in message
news:5014fb1d$0$4129$c83e...@weathergirl-read.tele2.net...
> Even I knew this adjective.
no matches at the British National Corpus. Google has 361 hits, some of
which appear to be puns on the name of the London district (or "hackney
carriage"), some of which seem to be errors for "hackneyed", and some of
which seem to have no clear meaning at all:
"As adorable as my husband is, he is clearly misguided, as he went along
with my hackney eyed scheme."
http://beckeysburblingblog.blogspot.co.uk/2012/01/dude-she-got-me-legs.html
What's that - "hackneyed", "cock-eyed" or a portmanteau of the two?
--
Guy Barry
M Winther
Jul 29, 2012, 6:01:25 AM7/29/12
to
"Guy Barry" <guy....@blueyonder.co.uk> skrev i meddelandet
news:6o7Rr.380756$Ql1.1...@fx02.am4...
horse, a carriage, or a car that is kept for public hire. It is also
any of an English breed of rather compact usu. chestnut, bay, or brown
high-stepping horses. It is a horse suitable for ordinary riding or
driving. A hackney can also mean a drudge.
There is a verb "hackney" (hackneyed ; hackneying) (1596) which means
to make common or frequent use of, or to make trite, vulgar, or
commonplace.
So the adjective hackneyed is connected to something commonplace,
lacking in freshness or originality. I suppose one can associate it
with an old horse or carriage kept for public hire, i.e. something
worn-out.
Mats Winther
Guy Barry
Jul 29, 2012, 6:05:59 AM7/29/12
to
news:501509fa$0$4139$c83e...@weathergirl-read.tele2.net...
> According to Webster's Dictionary (Infopedia) a hackney (1589) is a
> horse, a carriage, or a car that is kept for public hire. It is also
> any of an English breed of rather compact usu. chestnut, bay, or brown
> high-stepping horses. It is a horse suitable for ordinary riding or
> driving. A hackney can also mean a drudge.
>
> There is a verb "hackney" (hackneyed ; hackneying) (1596) which means
> to make common or frequent use of, or to make trite, vulgar, or
> commonplace.
>
> So the adjective hackneyed is connected to something commonplace,
> lacking in freshness or originality. I suppose one can associate it
> with an old horse or carriage kept for public hire, i.e. something
> worn-out.
I'm familiar with all those usages. I was asking about the term
"hackney-eyed", which appears to be non-standard.
--
Guy Barry
> According to Webster's Dictionary (Infopedia) a hackney (1589) is a
> horse, a carriage, or a car that is kept for public hire. It is also
> any of an English breed of rather compact usu. chestnut, bay, or brown
> high-stepping horses. It is a horse suitable for ordinary riding or
> driving. A hackney can also mean a drudge.
>
> There is a verb "hackney" (hackneyed ; hackneying) (1596) which means
> to make common or frequent use of, or to make trite, vulgar, or
> commonplace.
>
> So the adjective hackneyed is connected to something commonplace,
> lacking in freshness or originality. I suppose one can associate it
> with an old horse or carriage kept for public hire, i.e. something
> worn-out.
"hackney-eyed", which appears to be non-standard.
--
Guy Barry
CDB
Jul 29, 2012, 6:24:34 AM7/29/12
to
On Jul 29, 6:05 am, "Guy Barry" <guy.ba...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> "M Winther" <m...@swipnet.se> wrote in message
Stared at menacingly by cabbies, dur.
> "M Winther" <m...@swipnet.se> wrote in message
Steve Hayes
Jul 29, 2012, 6:40:23 AM7/29/12
to
On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 08:11:09 +0100, "Guy Barry" <guy....@blueyonder.co.uk>
wrote:
Or wall-eyed, since a hackney is a horse, or a cab pulled by one, but only the
horse has eyes.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
wrote:
horse has eyes.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
M Winther
Jul 29, 2012, 7:04:04 AM7/29/12
to
news:xX7Rr.512281$%k.8...@fx20.am4...
It is obviously a misunderstanding. Why get hung up on trifles?
Mats
Mats
Guy Barry
Jul 29, 2012, 7:09:35 AM7/29/12
to
news:501518a8$0$4125$c83e...@weathergirl-read.tele2.net...
impression that you were familiar with the word. Are you?
--
Guy Barry
>
> "Guy Barry" <guy....@blueyonder.co.uk> skrev i meddelandet
> news:xX7Rr.512281$%k.8...@fx20.am4...
> "Guy Barry" <guy....@blueyonder.co.uk> skrev i meddelandet
> news:xX7Rr.512281$%k.8...@fx20.am4...
> > I'm familiar with all those usages. I was asking about the term
> > "hackney-eyed", which appears to be non-standard.
> > "hackney-eyed", which appears to be non-standard.
> It is obviously a misunderstanding. Why get hung up on trifles?
Well, the word in the subject line is "hackney-eyed", and I got the
impression that you were familiar with the word. Are you?
--
Guy Barry
M Winther
Jul 29, 2012, 7:45:48 AM7/29/12
to
"Guy Barry" <guy....@blueyonder.co.uk> skrev i meddelandet
news:aT8Rr.277591$3s1....@fx12.am4...
misunderstand words and phrasal verbs. In Swedish these
misunderstandings are rather common, also among radio and TV
announcers. They say "g� under jorden" (go under the ground), when
they should say "g� underjord" (go underground). It is so stupid. It
means different things.
Mats Winther
GordonD
Jul 29, 2012, 8:07:08 AM7/29/12
to
"M Winther" <ml...@swipnet.se> wrote in message
news:5015226f$0$4126$c83e...@weathergirl-read.tele2.net...
> "Guy Barry" <guy....@blueyonder.co.uk> skrev i meddelandet
> news:aT8Rr.277591$3s1....@fx12.am4...
>>
>> "M Winther" <ml...@swipnet.se> wrote in message
>> news:501518a8$0$4125$c83e...@weathergirl-read.tele2.net...
>>>
>>> "Guy Barry" <guy....@blueyonder.co.uk> skrev i meddelandet
>>> news:xX7Rr.512281$%k.8...@fx20.am4...
>>
>>> > I'm familiar with all those usages. I was asking about the term
>>> > "hackney-eyed", which appears to be non-standard.
>>
>>> It is obviously a misunderstanding. Why get hung up on trifles?
>>
>> Well, the word in the subject line is "hackney-eyed", and I got the
>> impression that you were familiar with the word. Are you?
>>
>> --
>> Guy Barry
>>
>>
>>
>
> No. People these day, I believe, read less and less books.
Is it permissible - here of all places - to point out that this should be
> news:aT8Rr.277591$3s1....@fx12.am4...
>>
>> "M Winther" <ml...@swipnet.se> wrote in message
>> news:501518a8$0$4125$c83e...@weathergirl-read.tele2.net...
>>>
>>> "Guy Barry" <guy....@blueyonder.co.uk> skrev i meddelandet
>>> news:xX7Rr.512281$%k.8...@fx20.am4...
>>
>>> > I'm familiar with all those usages. I was asking about the term
>>> > "hackney-eyed", which appears to be non-standard.
>>
>>> It is obviously a misunderstanding. Why get hung up on trifles?
>>
>> Well, the word in the subject line is "hackney-eyed", and I got the
>> impression that you were familiar with the word. Are you?
>>
>> --
>> Guy Barry
>>
>>
>>
>
> No. People these day, I believe, read less and less books.
"fewer and fewer books" without being branded a troll?
--
Gordon Davie
Edinburgh, Scotland
"Slipped the surly bonds of Earth...to touch the face of God."
M Winther
Jul 29, 2012, 8:27:31 AM7/29/12
to
"GordonD" <g.d...@btinternet.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:a7knbg...@mid.individual.net...
No, that's what this group is for. But it's not my fault. I take after
English-speaking people. There are 4,140 hits on Google for "read less
and less books".
Mats Winther
news:a7knbg...@mid.individual.net...
English-speaking people. There are 4,140 hits on Google for "read less
and less books".
Mats Winther
Don Phillipson
Jul 29, 2012, 8:00:41 AM7/29/12
to
> On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 08:11:09 +0100, "Guy Barry"
> <guy....@blueyonder.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>>A British Conservative MP has been in the media criticizing the Olympic
>>opening ceremony. One of the adjectives he used to describe it was
>>"hackney-eyed". Presumably he had read the word "hackneyed" but never
>>heard
>>it, and falsely assumed that the last four letters formed a separate word
>>(although that wouldn't explain the extra syllable).
>>
>>Or perhaps he was thinking of "cock-eyed". Or perhaps he was confused by
>>the fact that the Olympic site is close to Hackney in east London.
Agreed: but we still do not know whether the source was in writing
> <guy....@blueyonder.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>>A British Conservative MP has been in the media criticizing the Olympic
>>opening ceremony. One of the adjectives he used to describe it was
>>"hackney-eyed". Presumably he had read the word "hackneyed" but never
>>heard
>>it, and falsely assumed that the last four letters formed a separate word
>>(although that wouldn't explain the extra syllable).
>>
>>Or perhaps he was thinking of "cock-eyed". Or perhaps he was confused by
>>the fact that the Olympic site is close to Hackney in east London.
or speech (thus whether the spelling is that of the MP or a reporter.)
It makes a difference so far as we may not exclude mishearing of
other variants, e.g. hacknified for hackneyed.
The ceremonial opening theatre showed how narrowly its creator
sees the mass of British history -- no Romans or Boadicea, no
Robin Hood or Coeur de Lion, no Gloriana (no royalty at all),
no Cavaliers and Roundheads (and no Chartists either), plenty
of children but no Boy Scouts or Brownies, not least (after 15 seconds
of incongruous Elgar) no music later than 1980 (except for American
swing in the amazing NHS tribute.)
One of the Canadian reporters present wrote that Branagh read
Prospero's speech: but as seen on TV he declaimed it without
a glance at his prompt book. This seems a Sign of the Times:
in petty, reporters' seeing no need nowadays to differentiate between
reading and recitation, and in grand the attitude to national myth
betokened by this "historical" pageant: it is all more or less the
same so it makes no difference what you include and what
you leave out (just as in the 21st century no one need differentiate
between hackneyed, hacknified and hackney-eyed, despite that
our lives are nowadays determined by precise computer coding . . .)
--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)
![Peter Duncanson [BrE]'s profile photo](http://lh3.googleusercontent.com/a-/ALV-UjU1GGYFBCZgBCNB-pRgkosMu-ej0qpnECw3jc8uGYOTiF8a=s40-c)
Peter Duncanson [BrE]
Jul 29, 2012, 9:00:35 AM7/29/12
to
On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 08:00:41 -0400, "Don Phillipson"
<e9...@SPAMBLOCK.ncf.ca> wrote:
>The ceremonial opening theatre showed how narrowly its creator
>sees the mass of British history -- no Romans or Boadicea, no
>Robin Hood or Coeur de Lion, no Gloriana (no royalty at all),
>no Cavaliers and Roundheads (and no Chartists either), plenty
>of children but no Boy Scouts or Brownies, not least (after 15 seconds
>of incongruous Elgar) no music later than 1980 (except for American
>swing in the amazing NHS tribute.)
If he'd taken a broader and fuller view of British history the event
<e9...@SPAMBLOCK.ncf.ca> wrote:
>The ceremonial opening theatre showed how narrowly its creator
>sees the mass of British history -- no Romans or Boadicea, no
>Robin Hood or Coeur de Lion, no Gloriana (no royalty at all),
>no Cavaliers and Roundheads (and no Chartists either), plenty
>of children but no Boy Scouts or Brownies, not least (after 15 seconds
>of incongruous Elgar) no music later than 1980 (except for American
>swing in the amazing NHS tribute.)
would still be in progress and the final day of it would be the closing
ceremony.
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
Peter Brooks
Jul 29, 2012, 10:04:45 AM7/29/12
to
pensive hamster
Jul 29, 2012, 10:24:37 AM7/29/12
to
reporting their criticisms) was deliberately attempting a (bad) pun on
the words "Hackney" and "hackneyed". Hackney is a fairly left-wing,
mostly low-income area of London, where probably hardly any
Conservative MPs live. The Olympics opening ceremony was criticised by
a small minority for being a bit left-wing, eg:
____________________
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/london-mayor-calls-attack-by-fellow-conservative-on-olympic-opening-ceremony-nonsense/2012/07/28/gJQAW0aJGX_story.html
http://preview.tinyurl.com/c9tnzmw
LONDON — London’s mayor says a fellow member of Britain’s governing
Conservative Party was talking nonsense when he criticized the Olympic
opening ceremony as too political.
Aidan Burley, a 33-year-old legislator, posted a message to his
Twitter account accusing Friday’s ceremony of being too “leftie” —
slang for politically left wing — and criticizing its use of rap
music.
[...]
London Mayor Boris Johnson, a member of the center-right
Conservatives, said Burley’s comments were “nonsense,” and the event
had left him with “hot tears of patriotic pride.”
____________________
So "hackney-eyed" could have been intended to mean "from a Hackney
(left-wing) point of view"
The pun might have worked had the opening ceremony also been
"hackneyed" (unoriginal, commonplace, banal, cliched), which I don't
think anyone is suggesting it was. So the possible attempted pun
doesn't really work.
So I think "hackney-eyed" was either a mis-pronounciation by the MP,
or a mis-hearing or misunderstanding by the reporter.
pensive hamster
Jul 29, 2012, 10:28:05 AM7/29/12
to
On Jul 29, 3:04 pm, Peter Brooks <peter.h.m.bro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sunday, 29 July 2012 13:04:04 UTC+2, M Winther wrote:
[...]
> On Sunday, 29 July 2012 13:04:04 UTC+2, M Winther wrote:
>
> > It is obviously a misunderstanding. Why get hung up on trifles?
>
> Wow - you certainly have some impressive trifles in your part of the world! The trifles I know wouldn't allow anybody to be hung from them.
My thoughts exactly. Clearly Swedish trifles are not to be trifled
> > It is obviously a misunderstanding. Why get hung up on trifles?
>
> Wow - you certainly have some impressive trifles in your part of the world! The trifles I know wouldn't allow anybody to be hung from them.
with.
tony cooper
Jul 29, 2012, 10:30:20 AM7/29/12
to
On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 12:01:25 +0200, "M Winther" <ml...@swipnet.se>
wrote:
I can understand the usage of "hackneyed" used to describe something
common, trite, ordinary, or uninteresting. What is at question here,
though, is "hackney-eyed". That doesn't make any sense at all to me.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
wrote:
common, trite, ordinary, or uninteresting. What is at question here,
though, is "hackney-eyed". That doesn't make any sense at all to me.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
M Winther
Jul 29, 2012, 10:43:31 AM7/29/12
to
"pensive hamster" <pensive...@hotmail.co.uk> skrev i meddelandet
news:daca0310-1600-458c...@l32g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
language. I get 1,020 hits for "get hung up on trifles" on Google.
Mats Winther
http://home7.swipnet.se/~w-73784/
GordonD
Jul 29, 2012, 10:51:59 AM7/29/12
to
"Don Phillipson" <e9...@SPAMBLOCK.ncf.ca> wrote in message
news:jv3anb$59b$1...@speranza.aioe.org...
news:jv3anb$59b$1...@speranza.aioe.org...
>> On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 08:11:09 +0100, "Guy Barry"
>> <guy....@blueyonder.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>A British Conservative MP has been in the media criticizing the Olympic
>>>opening ceremony. One of the adjectives he used to describe it was
>>>"hackney-eyed". Presumably he had read the word "hackneyed" but never
>>>heard
>>>it, and falsely assumed that the last four letters formed a separate word
>>>(although that wouldn't explain the extra syllable).
>>>
>>>Or perhaps he was thinking of "cock-eyed". Or perhaps he was confused by
>>>the fact that the Olympic site is close to Hackney in east London.
>
> Agreed: but we still do not know whether the source was in writing
> or speech (thus whether the spelling is that of the MP or a reporter.)
> It makes a difference so far as we may not exclude mishearing of
> other variants, e.g. hacknified for hackneyed.
I believe it was on Twitter.
>> <guy....@blueyonder.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>A British Conservative MP has been in the media criticizing the Olympic
>>>opening ceremony. One of the adjectives he used to describe it was
>>>"hackney-eyed". Presumably he had read the word "hackneyed" but never
>>>heard
>>>it, and falsely assumed that the last four letters formed a separate word
>>>(although that wouldn't explain the extra syllable).
>>>
>>>Or perhaps he was thinking of "cock-eyed". Or perhaps he was confused by
>>>the fact that the Olympic site is close to Hackney in east London.
>
> Agreed: but we still do not know whether the source was in writing
> or speech (thus whether the spelling is that of the MP or a reporter.)
> It makes a difference so far as we may not exclude mishearing of
> other variants, e.g. hacknified for hackneyed.
Katy Jennison
Jul 29, 2012, 11:11:46 AM7/29/12
to
we actually do in this group.
--
Katy Jennison
Guy Barry
Jul 29, 2012, 11:13:52 AM7/29/12
to
"Don Phillipson" <e9...@SPAMBLOCK.ncf.ca> wrote in message
news:jv3anb$59b$1...@speranza.aioe.org...
> > On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 08:11:09 +0100, "Guy Barry"
> > <guy....@blueyonder.co.uk>
> > wrote:
> >
> >>A British Conservative MP has been in the media criticizing the Olympic
> >>opening ceremony. One of the adjectives he used to describe it was
> >>"hackney-eyed". Presumably he had read the word "hackneyed" but never
> >>heard
> >>it, and falsely assumed that the last four letters formed a separate
word
> >>(although that wouldn't explain the extra syllable).
> >>
> >>Or perhaps he was thinking of "cock-eyed". Or perhaps he was confused
by
> >>the fact that the Olympic site is close to Hackney in east London.
>
> Agreed: but we still do not know whether the source was in writing
> or speech (thus whether the spelling is that of the MP or a reporter.)
I listened to the MP being interviewed on the radio. It was in his speech.
> > <guy....@blueyonder.co.uk>
> > wrote:
> >
> >>A British Conservative MP has been in the media criticizing the Olympic
> >>opening ceremony. One of the adjectives he used to describe it was
> >>"hackney-eyed". Presumably he had read the word "hackneyed" but never
> >>heard
> >>it, and falsely assumed that the last four letters formed a separate
word
> >>(although that wouldn't explain the extra syllable).
> >>
> >>Or perhaps he was thinking of "cock-eyed". Or perhaps he was confused
by
> >>the fact that the Olympic site is close to Hackney in east London.
>
> Agreed: but we still do not know whether the source was in writing
> or speech (thus whether the spelling is that of the MP or a reporter.)
--
Guy Barry
pensive hamster
Jul 29, 2012, 10:47:58 AM7/29/12
to
On Jul 29, 3:43 pm, "M Winther" <m...@swipnet.se> wrote:
> "pensive hamster" <pensive_hams...@hotmail.co.uk> skrev i meddelandetnews:daca0310-1600-458c...@l32g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
> "pensive hamster" <pensive_hams...@hotmail.co.uk> skrev i meddelandetnews:daca0310-1600-458c...@l32g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 29, 3:04 pm, Peter Brooks <peter.h.m.bro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sunday, 29 July 2012 13:04:04 UTC+2, M Winther wrote:
> [...]
>
> >> > It is obviously a misunderstanding. Why get hung up on trifles?
>
> >> Wow - you certainly have some impressive trifles in your part of
> >> the world! The trifles I know wouldn't allow >>anybody to be hung
> >> from them.
> >My thoughts exactly. Clearly Swedish trifles are not to be trifled
> >with.
>
> Perhaps you guys should devote more time to studying the English
> language. I get 1,020 hits for "get hung up on trifles" on Google.
>
'Twas a trifling ambiguity.
>
> > On Sunday, 29 July 2012 13:04:04 UTC+2, M Winther wrote:
> [...]
>
> >> > It is obviously a misunderstanding. Why get hung up on trifles?
>
> >> Wow - you certainly have some impressive trifles in your part of
> >> the world! The trifles I know wouldn't allow >>anybody to be hung
> >> from them.
> >My thoughts exactly. Clearly Swedish trifles are not to be trifled
> >with.
>
> Perhaps you guys should devote more time to studying the English
> language. I get 1,020 hits for "get hung up on trifles" on Google.
>
M Winther
Jul 29, 2012, 11:18:02 AM7/29/12
to
"Katy Jennison" <ka...@spamtrap.kjennison.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:jv3jrh$1sq$1...@news.albasani.net...
shouldn't be able to get hung up on a trifle.
Mats
pensive hamster
Jul 29, 2012, 11:24:13 AM7/29/12
to
On Jul 29, 4:11 pm, Katy Jennison <k...@spamtrap.kjennison.com> wrote:
> On 29/07/2012 15:43, M Winther wrote:
[...]
> On 29/07/2012 15:43, M Winther wrote:
> > Perhaps you guys should devote more time to studying the English
> > language. I get 1,020 hits for "get hung up on trifles" on Google.
>
> Ah - Mr Winther. Perhaps you should devote more time to studying what
> we actually do in this group.
>
And someone who writes: 'I get 1,020 hits for "get hung up on trifles"
> > language. I get 1,020 hits for "get hung up on trifles" on Google.
>
> Ah - Mr Winther. Perhaps you should devote more time to studying what
> we actually do in this group.
>
on Google' is almost the definition of someone prone to getting hung
up on trifles ...
Guy Barry
Jul 29, 2012, 11:23:05 AM7/29/12
to
"pensive hamster" <pensive...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:6296d802-083b-4a37...@u9g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 29, 8:11 am, "Guy Barry" <guy.ba...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> So I think "hackney-eyed" was either a mis-pronounciation by the MP,
> or a mis-hearing or misunderstanding by the reporter.
It was a recording of the MP's statement, so it can't be the latter.
> So I think "hackney-eyed" was either a mis-pronounciation by the MP,
> or a mis-hearing or misunderstanding by the reporter.
However, the MP in question (Aidan Burley) is notoriously right-wing, and
Hackney (the London borough) is notoriously left-wing, so maybe that was the
intended meaning.
--
Guy Barry
R H Draney
Jul 29, 2012, 5:15:53 PM7/29/12
to
Don Phillipson filted:
mention of Harry Potter either....r
--
Me? Sarcastic?
Yeah, right.
>
>The ceremonial opening theatre showed how narrowly its creator
>sees the mass of British history -- no Romans or Boadicea, no
>Robin Hood or Coeur de Lion, no Gloriana (no royalty at all),
>no Cavaliers and Roundheads (and no Chartists either), plenty
>of children but no Boy Scouts or Brownies, not least (after 15 seconds
>of incongruous Elgar) no music later than 1980 (except for American
>swing in the amazing NHS tribute.)
No Teletubbies, no Spice Girls, no Amy Winehouse?...I suppose there was no
>The ceremonial opening theatre showed how narrowly its creator
>sees the mass of British history -- no Romans or Boadicea, no
>Robin Hood or Coeur de Lion, no Gloriana (no royalty at all),
>no Cavaliers and Roundheads (and no Chartists either), plenty
>of children but no Boy Scouts or Brownies, not least (after 15 seconds
>of incongruous Elgar) no music later than 1980 (except for American
>swing in the amazing NHS tribute.)
mention of Harry Potter either....r
--
Me? Sarcastic?
Yeah, right.
GordonD
Jul 29, 2012, 6:12:52 PM7/29/12
to
"R H Draney" <dado...@spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:jv496...@drn.newsguy.com...
Voldemort was there (along with the Child Catcher) but was chased away by
all the Mary Poppinses.
news:jv496...@drn.newsguy.com...
all the Mary Poppinses.
Robert Bannister
Jul 29, 2012, 11:16:09 PM7/29/12
to
cream, please.
--
Robert Bannister
Robert Bannister
Jul 29, 2012, 11:17:53 PM7/29/12
to
On 29/07/12 10:04 PM, Peter Brooks wrote:
> Wow - you certainly have some impressive trifles in your part of the
> world! The trifles I know wouldn't allow anybody to be hung from
> them.
The trifle my mum used to make could give you a hang-over.
> Wow - you certainly have some impressive trifles in your part of the
> world! The trifles I know wouldn't allow anybody to be hung from
> them.
--
Robert Bannister
Message has been deleted
fabzorba
Jul 29, 2012, 11:33:16 PM7/29/12
to
On 30 July, 00:30, tony cooper <tony.cooper...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I can understand the usage of "hackneyed" used to describe something
> common, trite, ordinary, or uninteresting. What is at question here,
> though, is "hackney-eyed". That doesn't make any sense at all to me.
>
It is most probable that it is a simple mistake. But "hackney-eyed"
> I can understand the usage of "hackneyed" used to describe something
> common, trite, ordinary, or uninteresting. What is at question here,
> though, is "hackney-eyed". That doesn't make any sense at all to me.
>
could suggest something like "jaded" or "blase". Now that I think upon
it, Philip Marlowe would be "hackney-eyed".
myles [but hackney-eyed is the OPPOSITE of cock-eyed] paulsen
fabzorba
Jul 29, 2012, 11:40:54 PM7/29/12
to
On 30 July, 01:11, Katy Jennison <k...@spamtrap.kjennison.com> wrote:
> On 29/07/2012 15:43, M Winther wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "pensive hamster"<pensive_hams...@hotmail.co.uk> skrev i meddelandet
> On 29/07/2012 15:43, M Winther wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
inning. Time to turn in. Time to strike the tent.
Now all anyone has to do to ascertain what constitutes acceptable
English usage is to Google the proposed variants, and count the hits
given. See, we can all go home now. You'll find me at "radio
archers" and alt.macrame.patterns if you want a chin wag.
myles [Otoh, you leave my tent alone...) paulsen
Guy Barry
Jul 30, 2012, 3:28:47 AM7/30/12
to
"fabzorba" <myles....@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:26def4b4-cbbc-4ced...@nw7g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
> On 30 July, 00:30, tony cooper <tony.cooper...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I can understand the usage of "hackneyed" used to describe something
> > common, trite, ordinary, or uninteresting. What is at question here,
> > though, is "hackney-eyed". That doesn't make any sense at all to me.
>
> It is most probable that it is a simple mistake.
I thought that initially, but Google throws up enough occurrences of it to
> > I can understand the usage of "hackneyed" used to describe something
> > common, trite, ordinary, or uninteresting. What is at question here,
> > though, is "hackney-eyed". That doesn't make any sense at all to me.
>
> It is most probable that it is a simple mistake.
suggest that it has some currency. Mostly it simply seems to mean
"hackneyed", but sometimes it seems to have connotations of "cock-eyed" as
well. (One writer apologizes for his "hackney-eyed German", for instance.)
What I can't fathom is how the usage came about. I can only conclude that
the visual appearance of the word "hackneyed" led some people to think that
"eyed" was part of the word, and so they started pronouncing it separately,
and eventually writing it separately - a sort of meta-linguistic stutter.
It's bizarre.
--
Guy Barry
R H Draney
Jul 30, 2012, 5:28:37 AM7/30/12
to
Robert Bannister filted:
Then you can probably handle this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mx5Wpqf4-OM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mx5Wpqf4-OM
R H Draney
Jul 30, 2012, 5:32:16 AM7/30/12
to
GordonD filted:
>
>"R H Draney" <dado...@spamcop.net> wrote in message
>news:jv496...@drn.newsguy.com...
>> Don Phillipson filted:
>>>
>>>The ceremonial opening theatre showed how narrowly its creator
>>>sees the mass of British history -- no Romans or Boadicea, no
>>>Robin Hood or Coeur de Lion, no Gloriana (no royalty at all),
>>>no Cavaliers and Roundheads (and no Chartists either), plenty
>>>of children but no Boy Scouts or Brownies, not least (after 15 seconds
>>>of incongruous Elgar) no music later than 1980 (except for American
>>>swing in the amazing NHS tribute.)
>>
>> No Teletubbies, no Spice Girls, no Amy Winehouse?...I suppose there was no
>> mention of Harry Potter either....r
>
>
>Voldemort was there (along with the Child Catcher) but was chased away by
>all the Mary Poppinses.
I'm afraid I missed it...can anyone point me to a replay?...r
>"R H Draney" <dado...@spamcop.net> wrote in message
>news:jv496...@drn.newsguy.com...
>> Don Phillipson filted:
>>>
>>>The ceremonial opening theatre showed how narrowly its creator
>>>sees the mass of British history -- no Romans or Boadicea, no
>>>Robin Hood or Coeur de Lion, no Gloriana (no royalty at all),
>>>no Cavaliers and Roundheads (and no Chartists either), plenty
>>>of children but no Boy Scouts or Brownies, not least (after 15 seconds
>>>of incongruous Elgar) no music later than 1980 (except for American
>>>swing in the amazing NHS tribute.)
>>
>> No Teletubbies, no Spice Girls, no Amy Winehouse?...I suppose there was no
>> mention of Harry Potter either....r
>
>
>Voldemort was there (along with the Child Catcher) but was chased away by
>all the Mary Poppinses.
John Holmes
Jul 30, 2012, 5:47:26 AM7/30/12
to
--
Regards
John
for mail: my initials plus a u e
at tpg dot com dot au
Guy Barry
Jul 30, 2012, 7:05:56 AM7/30/12
to
On Jul 29, 3:24 pm, pensive hamster <pensive_hams...@hotmail.co.uk>
wrote:
> It could be that the British Conservative MP (or the journalist
> reporting their criticisms) was deliberately attempting a (bad) pun on
> the words "Hackney" and "hackneyed". [...]
[quoting Washington Post article]
was someone other than Aidan Burley. It was Aidan Burley himself who
made the remarks. After he had been criticized for his comments on
Twitter about multiculturalism, he was interviewed on the BBC about
them and explained that he wasn't criticizing multiculturalism itself,
rather the fact that the ceremony was "hackney-eyed and cliched". I
can't remember the entire interview.
> The pun might have worked had the opening ceremony also been
> "hackneyed" (unoriginal, commonplace, banal, cliched), which I don't
> think anyone is suggesting it was.
That's precisely what he was suggesting. The fact that he paired it
with "cliched" means that he almost certainly meant "hackneyed".
Despite what I said previously, I don't seriously think he was trying
to make a joke about the London borough of Hackney.
--
Guy Barry
wrote:
> It could be that the British Conservative MP (or the journalist
> reporting their criticisms) was deliberately attempting a (bad) pun on
[quoting Washington Post article]
> LONDON — London’s mayor says a fellow member of Britain’s governing
> Conservative Party was talking nonsense when he criticized the Olympic
> opening ceremony as too political.
>
> Aidan Burley, a 33-year-old legislator, posted a message to his
> Twitter account accusing Friday’s ceremony of being too “leftie” —
> slang for politically left wing — and criticizing its use of rap
> music.
On re-reading your message, I get the impression that you think the MP
> Conservative Party was talking nonsense when he criticized the Olympic
> opening ceremony as too political.
>
> Aidan Burley, a 33-year-old legislator, posted a message to his
> Twitter account accusing Friday’s ceremony of being too “leftie” —
> slang for politically left wing — and criticizing its use of rap
> music.
was someone other than Aidan Burley. It was Aidan Burley himself who
made the remarks. After he had been criticized for his comments on
Twitter about multiculturalism, he was interviewed on the BBC about
them and explained that he wasn't criticizing multiculturalism itself,
rather the fact that the ceremony was "hackney-eyed and cliched". I
can't remember the entire interview.
> The pun might have worked had the opening ceremony also been
> "hackneyed" (unoriginal, commonplace, banal, cliched), which I don't
> think anyone is suggesting it was.
with "cliched" means that he almost certainly meant "hackneyed".
Despite what I said previously, I don't seriously think he was trying
to make a joke about the London borough of Hackney.
--
Guy Barry
pensive hamster
Jul 30, 2012, 8:39:16 AM7/30/12
to
On Jul 30, 12:05 pm, Guy Barry <guy.ba...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>
> On re-reading your message, I get the impression that you think the MP
> was someone other than Aidan Burley. It was Aidan Burley himself who
> made the remarks. After he had been criticized for his comments on
> Twitter about multiculturalism, he was interviewed on the BBC about
> them and explained that he wasn't criticizing multiculturalism itself,
> rather the fact that the ceremony was "hackney-eyed and cliched". I
> can't remember the entire interview.
>
I hadn't previously heard of Aidan Burley or his tweets about the
>
> On re-reading your message, I get the impression that you think the MP
> was someone other than Aidan Burley. It was Aidan Burley himself who
> made the remarks. After he had been criticized for his comments on
> Twitter about multiculturalism, he was interviewed on the BBC about
> them and explained that he wasn't criticizing multiculturalism itself,
> rather the fact that the ceremony was "hackney-eyed and cliched". I
> can't remember the entire interview.
>
Olympics Opening Ceremony, so I didn't mean to suggest it was some
other MP, I just didn't know who it was. He is not a very well known
MP.
Googling him, it seems his main claim to fame is being sacked by PM
David Cameron from his post as parliamentary private secretary to
Transport Secretary Justine Greening for attending a party where
guests dressed up as Nazis and drank toasts to senior figures in the
Nazi regime. Talk about clichéd. He was reportedly responsible for
hiring the uniforms.
No wonder he thought the opening ceremony was a bit leftie.
> > The pun might have worked had the opening ceremony also been
> > "hackneyed" (unoriginal, commonplace, banal, cliched), which I don't
> > think anyone is suggesting it was.
>
> That's precisely what he was suggesting. The fact that he paired it
> with "cliched" means that he almost certainly meant "hackneyed".
> Despite what I said previously, I don't seriously think he was trying
> to make a joke about the London borough of Hackney.
>
hackney-eyed? Maybe we have been misunderestimating him?
pensive hamster
Jul 30, 2012, 8:41:40 AM7/30/12
to
On Jul 30, 10:32 am, R H Draney <dadoc...@spamcop.net> wrote:
>
> I'm afraid I missed it...can anyone point me to a replay?...r
>
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01l4ldk/Olympic_Ceremonies_London_2012_Opening_Ceremony/
>
> I'm afraid I missed it...can anyone point me to a replay?...r
>
http://preview.tinyurl.com/cz9vs69
Whiskers
Jul 30, 2012, 9:11:11 AM7/30/12
to
of "hits"; Google tends to give an exaggerated impression of how often a
search term is really found. Teoma finds three (3) results for "get
hung up on trifles" - and one of them is Swedish. (It also offers a
list of possible 'related searches' which includes "Antigone Summary",
which I applaud as a demonstration of instructive intent, but I don't
know where the trifle comes in).
--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~
Nick Spalding
Jul 30, 2012, 9:31:20 AM7/30/12
to
pensive hamster wrote, in
<d334f2ac-1e74-4bf4...@3g2000vbx.googlegroups.com>
on Mon, 30 Jul 2012 05:39:16 -0700 (PDT):
>On Jul 30, 12:05锟絧m, Guy Barry <guy.ba...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> On re-reading your message, I get the impression that you think the MP
>> was someone other than Aidan Burley. 锟絀t was Aidan Burley himself who
>> made the remarks. 锟紸fter he had been criticized for his comments on
was pronounced.
--
Nick Spalding
BrE/IrE
<d334f2ac-1e74-4bf4...@3g2000vbx.googlegroups.com>
on Mon, 30 Jul 2012 05:39:16 -0700 (PDT):
>On Jul 30, 12:05锟絧m, Guy Barry <guy.ba...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> On re-reading your message, I get the impression that you think the MP
>> made the remarks. 锟紸fter he had been criticized for his comments on
>> Twitter about multiculturalism, he was interviewed on the BBC about
>> them and explained that he wasn't criticizing multiculturalism itself,
>> rather the fact that the ceremony was "hackney-eyed and cliched". 锟絀
>> them and explained that he wasn't criticizing multiculturalism itself,
>> can't remember the entire interview.
>>
>
>I hadn't previously heard of Aidan Burley or his tweets about the
>Olympics Opening Ceremony, so I didn't mean to suggest it was some
>other MP, I just didn't know who it was. He is not a very well known
>MP.
>
>Googling him, it seems his main claim to fame is being sacked by PM
>David Cameron from his post as parliamentary private secretary to
>Transport Secretary Justine Greening for attending a party where
>guests dressed up as Nazis and drank toasts to senior figures in the
>Nazi regime. Talk about clich锟絛. He was reportedly responsible for
>>
>
>I hadn't previously heard of Aidan Burley or his tweets about the
>Olympics Opening Ceremony, so I didn't mean to suggest it was some
>other MP, I just didn't know who it was. He is not a very well known
>MP.
>
>Googling him, it seems his main claim to fame is being sacked by PM
>David Cameron from his post as parliamentary private secretary to
>Transport Secretary Justine Greening for attending a party where
>guests dressed up as Nazis and drank toasts to senior figures in the
>hiring the uniforms.
>
>No wonder he thought the opening ceremony was a bit leftie.
>
>
>> > The pun might have worked had the opening ceremony also been
>> > "hackneyed" (unoriginal, commonplace, banal, cliched), which I don't
>> > think anyone is suggesting it was.
>>
>> That's precisely what he was suggesting. 锟絋he fact that he paired it
>
>No wonder he thought the opening ceremony was a bit leftie.
>
>
>> > The pun might have worked had the opening ceremony also been
>> > "hackneyed" (unoriginal, commonplace, banal, cliched), which I don't
>> > think anyone is suggesting it was.
>>
>> with "cliched" means that he almost certainly meant "hackneyed".
>> Despite what I said previously, I don't seriously think he was trying
>> to make a joke about the London borough of Hackney.
>>
>
>Perhaps he's accidentally (or even deliberately) made up a new word,
>hackney-eyed? Maybe we have been misunderestimating him?
I think he is just plain ignorant and thought that was how "hackneyed"
>> Despite what I said previously, I don't seriously think he was trying
>> to make a joke about the London borough of Hackney.
>>
>
>Perhaps he's accidentally (or even deliberately) made up a new word,
>hackney-eyed? Maybe we have been misunderestimating him?
was pronounced.
--
Nick Spalding
BrE/IrE
Peter Moylan
Jul 30, 2012, 10:12:05 AM7/30/12
to
On 29/07/12 20:05, Guy Barry wrote:
> "M Winther" <ml...@swipnet.se> wrote in message
> news:501509fa$0$4139$c83e...@weathergirl-read.tele2.net...
>
>> According to Webster's Dictionary (Infopedia) a hackney (1589) is a
>> horse, a carriage, or a car that is kept for public hire. It is also
>> any of an English breed of rather compact usu. chestnut, bay, or brown
>> high-stepping horses. It is a horse suitable for ordinary riding or
>> driving. A hackney can also mean a drudge.
>>
>> There is a verb "hackney" (hackneyed ; hackneying) (1596) which means
>> to make common or frequent use of, or to make trite, vulgar, or
>> commonplace.
>>
>> So the adjective hackneyed is connected to something commonplace,
>> lacking in freshness or originality. I suppose one can associate it
>> with an old horse or carriage kept for public hire, i.e. something
>> worn-out.
>
> I'm familiar with all those usages. I was asking about the term
> "hackney-eyed", which appears to be non-standard.
A mispronunciation of "hackn-eyed"?
> "M Winther" <ml...@swipnet.se> wrote in message
> news:501509fa$0$4139$c83e...@weathergirl-read.tele2.net...
>
>> According to Webster's Dictionary (Infopedia) a hackney (1589) is a
>> horse, a carriage, or a car that is kept for public hire. It is also
>> any of an English breed of rather compact usu. chestnut, bay, or brown
>> high-stepping horses. It is a horse suitable for ordinary riding or
>> driving. A hackney can also mean a drudge.
>>
>> There is a verb "hackney" (hackneyed ; hackneying) (1596) which means
>> to make common or frequent use of, or to make trite, vulgar, or
>> commonplace.
>>
>> So the adjective hackneyed is connected to something commonplace,
>> lacking in freshness or originality. I suppose one can associate it
>> with an old horse or carriage kept for public hire, i.e. something
>> worn-out.
>
> I'm familiar with all those usages. I was asking about the term
> "hackney-eyed", which appears to be non-standard.
--
Peter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org
For an e-mail address, see my web page.
Peter Duncanson [BrE]
Jul 30, 2012, 10:13:12 AM7/30/12
to
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
Peter Duncanson [BrE]
Jul 30, 2012, 10:16:49 AM7/30/12
to
On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 05:39:16 -0700 (PDT), pensive hamster
<pensive...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>On Jul 30, 12:05锟絧m, Guy Barry <guy.ba...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> On re-reading your message, I get the impression that you think the MP
>> was someone other than Aidan Burley. 锟絀t was Aidan Burley himself who
>> made the remarks. 锟紸fter he had been criticized for his comments on
interpreted as nazi salutes.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/olympics/9436019/German-anger-as-dignitary-accused-of-performing-Nazi-salute-at-opening-ceremony.html
or
http://preview.tinyurl.com/csqbjls
<pensive...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>On Jul 30, 12:05锟絧m, Guy Barry <guy.ba...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> On re-reading your message, I get the impression that you think the MP
>> made the remarks. 锟紸fter he had been criticized for his comments on
>> Twitter about multiculturalism, he was interviewed on the BBC about
>> them and explained that he wasn't criticizing multiculturalism itself,
>> rather the fact that the ceremony was "hackney-eyed and cliched". 锟絀
>> them and explained that he wasn't criticizing multiculturalism itself,
>> can't remember the entire interview.
>>
>
>I hadn't previously heard of Aidan Burley or his tweets about the
>Olympics Opening Ceremony, so I didn't mean to suggest it was some
>other MP, I just didn't know who it was. He is not a very well known
>MP.
>
>Googling him, it seems his main claim to fame is being sacked by PM
>David Cameron from his post as parliamentary private secretary to
>Transport Secretary Justine Greening for attending a party where
>guests dressed up as Nazis and drank toasts to senior figures in the
>Nazi regime. Talk about clich锟絛. He was reportedly responsible for
>>
>
>I hadn't previously heard of Aidan Burley or his tweets about the
>Olympics Opening Ceremony, so I didn't mean to suggest it was some
>other MP, I just didn't know who it was. He is not a very well known
>MP.
>
>Googling him, it seems his main claim to fame is being sacked by PM
>David Cameron from his post as parliamentary private secretary to
>Transport Secretary Justine Greening for attending a party where
>guests dressed up as Nazis and drank toasts to senior figures in the
>hiring the uniforms.
>
>No wonder he thought the opening ceremony was a bit leftie.
There was a member of the audience who repeatedly gave what were
>
>No wonder he thought the opening ceremony was a bit leftie.
interpreted as nazi salutes.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/olympics/9436019/German-anger-as-dignitary-accused-of-performing-Nazi-salute-at-opening-ceremony.html
or
http://preview.tinyurl.com/csqbjls
Evan Kirshenbaum
Jul 30, 2012, 2:24:39 PM7/30/12
to
"M Winther" <ml...@swipnet.se> writes:
> No, that's what this group is for. But it's not my fault. I take after
> English-speaking people. There are 4,140 hits on Google for "read less
> and less books".
Really? I get a whopping 63. Including this thread. And a number of
duplicates. And things like
Although nowadays I read less and less, books are still one
important component I'd like to have in the house.
and
As people became more and more used to the instant gratification
of TV, they read less and less. Books were abridged and edited ...
which are, of course, fine.
And also things that barely approach English on other grounds, e.g.,
i'm agree with you.kids read less and less books.they are attract
by other thing which are more interresant for they.
I'd say that this is actually a pretty rare construction for native
speakers.
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
Still with HP Labs |The General Theorem of Usenet
SF Bay Area (1982-) |Information: If you really want to
Chicago (1964-1982) |know the definitive answer, post
|the wrong information, and wait for
evan.kir...@gmail.com |someone to come by and explain in
|excruciating detail precisely how
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ |wrong you are.
| Eric The Read
> No, that's what this group is for. But it's not my fault. I take after
> English-speaking people. There are 4,140 hits on Google for "read less
> and less books".
Really? I get a whopping 63. Including this thread. And a number of
duplicates. And things like
Although nowadays I read less and less, books are still one
important component I'd like to have in the house.
and
As people became more and more used to the instant gratification
of TV, they read less and less. Books were abridged and edited ...
which are, of course, fine.
And also things that barely approach English on other grounds, e.g.,
i'm agree with you.kids read less and less books.they are attract
by other thing which are more interresant for they.
I'd say that this is actually a pretty rare construction for native
speakers.
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
Still with HP Labs |The General Theorem of Usenet
SF Bay Area (1982-) |Information: If you really want to
Chicago (1964-1982) |know the definitive answer, post
|the wrong information, and wait for
evan.kir...@gmail.com |someone to come by and explain in
|excruciating detail precisely how
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ |wrong you are.
| Eric The Read
Guy Barry
Jul 30, 2012, 2:35:21 PM7/30/12
to
"Evan Kirshenbaum" <evan.kir...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:r4rtds...@gmail.com...
> "M Winther" <ml...@swipnet.se> writes:
>
> > No, that's what this group is for. But it's not my fault. I take after
> > English-speaking people. There are 4,140 hits on Google for "read less
> > and less books".
>
> Really? I get a whopping 63. Including this thread.
I get 4,100. I'm really not sure what these Google counts are meant to
>
> > No, that's what this group is for. But it's not my fault. I take after
> > English-speaking people. There are 4,140 hits on Google for "read less
> > and less books".
>
> Really? I get a whopping 63. Including this thread.
indicate.
--
Guy Barry
James Hogg
Jul 30, 2012, 3:01:17 PM7/30/12
to
misleading figure like that. Browse to page 10 of all those hits and
you'll find that the number has fallen dramatically. I got 61.
--
James
John Varela
Jul 30, 2012, 3:44:58 PM7/30/12
to
On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 14:13:12 UTC, "Peter Duncanson [BrE]"
<ma...@peterduncanson.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 05:41:40 -0700 (PDT), pensive hamster
> <pensive...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >On Jul 30, 10:32�am, R H Draney <dadoc...@spamcop.net> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> I'm afraid I missed it...can anyone point me to a replay?...r
> >>
> >
> >http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01l4ldk/Olympic_Ceremonies_London_2012_Opening_Ceremony/
> >http://preview.tinyurl.com/cz9vs69
>
> Is that accessible outside the UK?
No.
<ma...@peterduncanson.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 05:41:40 -0700 (PDT), pensive hamster
> <pensive...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >On Jul 30, 10:32�am, R H Draney <dadoc...@spamcop.net> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> I'm afraid I missed it...can anyone point me to a replay?...r
> >>
> >
> >http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01l4ldk/Olympic_Ceremonies_London_2012_Opening_Ceremony/
> >http://preview.tinyurl.com/cz9vs69
>
> Is that accessible outside the UK?
--
John Varela
Robert Bannister
Jul 30, 2012, 9:26:02 PM7/30/12
to
On 30/07/12 5:28 PM, R H Draney wrote:
> Robert Bannister filted:
>>
>> On 29/07/12 10:04 PM, Peter Brooks wrote:
>>
>>> Wow - you certainly have some impressive trifles in your part of the
>>> world! The trifles I know wouldn't allow anybody to be hung from
>>> them.
>>
>> The trifle my mum used to make could give you a hang-over.
>
> Then you can probably handle this:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mx5Wpqf4-OM
Very good. I loved the "and only one layer of jam".
> Robert Bannister filted:
>>
>> On 29/07/12 10:04 PM, Peter Brooks wrote:
>>
>>> Wow - you certainly have some impressive trifles in your part of the
>>> world! The trifles I know wouldn't allow anybody to be hung from
>>> them.
>>
>> The trifle my mum used to make could give you a hang-over.
>
> Then you can probably handle this:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mx5Wpqf4-OM
--
Robert Bannister
Message has been deleted
Peter Moylan
Jul 30, 2012, 9:55:01 PM7/30/12
to
On 31/07/12 04:24, Evan Kirshenbaum wrote:
> "M Winther" <ml...@swipnet.se> writes:
>
>> No, that's what this group is for. But it's not my fault. I take after
>> English-speaking people. There are 4,140 hits on Google for "read less
>> and less books".
>
> Really? I get a whopping 63. Including this thread. And a number of
> duplicates. And things like
>
> Although nowadays I read less and less, books are still one
> important component I'd like to have in the house.
>
> and
>
> As people became more and more used to the instant gratification
> of TV, they read less and less. Books were abridged and edited ...
>
> which are, of course, fine.
>
> And also things that barely approach English on other grounds, e.g.,
>
> i'm agree with you.kids read less and less books.they are attract
> by other thing which are more interresant for they.
>
> I'd say that this is actually a pretty rare construction for native
> speakers.
>
One of the first hits, from someone apparently called "modes treading
> "M Winther" <ml...@swipnet.se> writes:
>
>> No, that's what this group is for. But it's not my fault. I take after
>> English-speaking people. There are 4,140 hits on Google for "read less
>> and less books".
>
> Really? I get a whopping 63. Including this thread. And a number of
> duplicates. And things like
>
> Although nowadays I read less and less, books are still one
> important component I'd like to have in the house.
>
> and
>
> As people became more and more used to the instant gratification
> of TV, they read less and less. Books were abridged and edited ...
>
> which are, of course, fine.
>
> And also things that barely approach English on other grounds, e.g.,
>
> i'm agree with you.kids read less and less books.they are attract
> by other thing which are more interresant for they.
>
> I'd say that this is actually a pretty rare construction for native
> speakers.
>
bat" contained the delightful
"As I tried to reach for the inevidentably unattainable, I found that
years had gone by and I read less and less books until I was reading
maybe one book a year, if that."
It might be worth adding "inevidentably" to the language, if we could
figure out what it meant.
A point worth noting about those 67 hits (some of which appear to be
duplicates): the people who are reading "less and less books" are almost
certainly reading less than the rest of us.
M Winther
Jul 31, 2012, 3:13:36 AM7/31/12
to
"Evan Kirshenbaum" <evan.kir...@gmail.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:r4rtds...@gmail.com...
> "M Winther" <ml...@swipnet.se> writes:
>
>> No, that's what this group is for. But it's not my fault. I take
>> after
>> English-speaking people. There are 4,140 hits on Google for "read
>> less
>> and less books".
>
> Really? I get a whopping 63. Including this thread. And a number of
> duplicates. And things like
>
> Although nowadays I read less and less, books are still one
> important component I'd like to have in the house.
>
> and
>
> As people became more and more used to the instant gratification
> of TV, they read less and less. Books were abridged and edited ...
>
> which are, of course, fine.
>
> And also things that barely approach English on other grounds, e.g.,
>
> i'm agree with you.kids read less and less books.they are attract
> by other thing which are more interresant for they.
>
> I'd say that this is actually a pretty rare construction for native
> speakers.
>
> --
> Evan Kirshenbaum
> +------------------------------------
So, I gather, I cannot say that (1) "I eat less and less vegetables
>
>> No, that's what this group is for. But it's not my fault. I take
>> after
>> English-speaking people. There are 4,140 hits on Google for "read
>> less
>> and less books".
>
> Really? I get a whopping 63. Including this thread. And a number of
> duplicates. And things like
>
> Although nowadays I read less and less, books are still one
> important component I'd like to have in the house.
>
> and
>
> As people became more and more used to the instant gratification
> of TV, they read less and less. Books were abridged and edited ...
>
> which are, of course, fine.
>
> And also things that barely approach English on other grounds, e.g.,
>
> i'm agree with you.kids read less and less books.they are attract
> by other thing which are more interresant for they.
>
> I'd say that this is actually a pretty rare construction for native
> speakers.
>
> --
> Evan Kirshenbaum
> +------------------------------------
these days", but must say (2) "I eat fewer and fewer vegetables these
days".
That doesn't make sense. Sentence (1) is correct.
So I conclude that (3) "I read less and less books these days" is a
correct sentence, because it is wholly analogous with (1).
Mats Winther
Evan Kirshenbaum
Jul 31, 2012, 3:29:59 AM7/31/12
to
"M Winther" <ml...@swipnet.se> writes:
> "Evan Kirshenbaum" <evan.kir...@gmail.com> skrev i meddelandet
> news:r4rtds...@gmail.com...
>> "M Winther" <ml...@swipnet.se> writes:
>>
>>> No, that's what this group is for. But it's not my fault. I take
>>> after
>>> English-speaking people. There are 4,140 hits on Google for "read
>>> less
>>> and less books".
>>
>> Really? I get a whopping 63. Including this thread. And a number of
>> duplicates. And things like
>>
>> Although nowadays I read less and less, books are still one
>> important component I'd like to have in the house.
>>
>> and
>>
>> As people became more and more used to the instant gratification
>> of TV, they read less and less. Books were abridged and edited ...
>>
>> which are, of course, fine.
>>
>> And also things that barely approach English on other grounds, e.g.,
>>
>> i'm agree with you.kids read less and less books.they are attract
>> by other thing which are more interresant for they.
>>
>> I'd say that this is actually a pretty rare construction for native
>> speakers.
>>
> "Evan Kirshenbaum" <evan.kir...@gmail.com> skrev i meddelandet
> news:r4rtds...@gmail.com...
>> "M Winther" <ml...@swipnet.se> writes:
>>
>>> No, that's what this group is for. But it's not my fault. I take
>>> after
>>> English-speaking people. There are 4,140 hits on Google for "read
>>> less
>>> and less books".
>>
>> Really? I get a whopping 63. Including this thread. And a number of
>> duplicates. And things like
>>
>> Although nowadays I read less and less, books are still one
>> important component I'd like to have in the house.
>>
>> and
>>
>> As people became more and more used to the instant gratification
>> of TV, they read less and less. Books were abridged and edited ...
>>
>> which are, of course, fine.
>>
>> And also things that barely approach English on other grounds, e.g.,
>>
>> i'm agree with you.kids read less and less books.they are attract
>> by other thing which are more interresant for they.
>>
>> I'd say that this is actually a pretty rare construction for native
>> speakers.
>>
> So, I gather, I cannot say that (1) "I eat less and less vegetables
> these days", but must say (2) "I eat fewer and fewer vegetables these
> days".
>
> That doesn't make sense. Sentence (1) is correct.
"Fewer and fewer vegetables" suggests that an enumeration of the
> these days", but must say (2) "I eat fewer and fewer vegetables these
> days".
>
> That doesn't make sense. Sentence (1) is correct.
vegetables you eat now is smaller than an enumeration of the
vegetables you used to eat. Perhaps you used to eat broccoli and
spinach, but you now no longer do. "Less and less vegetables" is a
bit awkward, but captures the sense that the amount of vegetable food
you now eat is less than the amount you used to eat.
> So I conclude that (3) "I read less and less books these days" is a
> correct sentence, because it is wholly analogous with (1).
read as an identifiable and enumerable thing.
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
Still with HP Labs |The look on our faces isn't confusion.
SF Bay Area (1982-) |It's disbelief.
Chicago (1964-1982) |
| Jon Stewart
evan.kir...@gmail.com
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/
Guy Barry
Jul 31, 2012, 3:40:30 AM7/31/12
to
news:501785a5$0$4137$c83e...@weathergirl-read.tele2.net...
> So, I gather, I cannot say that (1) "I eat less and less vegetables
> these days", but must say (2) "I eat fewer and fewer vegetables these
> days".
>
> That doesn't make sense. Sentence (1) is correct.
No it isn't - at least not by the normal rules of "correct English". You'll
often hear people saying it in informal speech, but it's generally
considered standard to use "less" with mass nouns and "fewer" with count
nouns. E.g. "I drink less and less water these days", "I eat fewer and
fewer vegetables".
> So I conclude that (3) "I read less and less books these days" is a
> correct sentence, because it is wholly analogous with (1).
You can make up your own rules if you like, but don't expect people to agree
with them.
--
Guy Barry
> So, I gather, I cannot say that (1) "I eat less and less vegetables
> these days", but must say (2) "I eat fewer and fewer vegetables these
> days".
>
> That doesn't make sense. Sentence (1) is correct.
often hear people saying it in informal speech, but it's generally
considered standard to use "less" with mass nouns and "fewer" with count
nouns. E.g. "I drink less and less water these days", "I eat fewer and
fewer vegetables".
> So I conclude that (3) "I read less and less books these days" is a
> correct sentence, because it is wholly analogous with (1).
with them.
--
Guy Barry
Peter Moylan
Jul 31, 2012, 3:44:08 AM7/31/12
to
On 31/07/12 17:13, M Winther wrote:
["read less and less books"]
> So, I gather, I cannot say that (1) "I eat less and less vegetables
> these days", but must say (2) "I eat fewer and fewer vegetables these
> days".
Close. You can say "I eat vegetables less and less these days". You
could also say "I eat less vegetables these days", but "less and less"
would be a bit of overkill.
Saying that you eat fewer vegetables would mean that there is less
variety in your diet. That's less likely to be something one would want
to say, unless the topic is the lack of choice in the shops.
When talking about books, the unit of discourse is the individual book.
When talking about vegetables, "one vegetable" means one kind of
vegetable. If you want to talk about your consumption of vegetables in
terms of total amount -- that is, in terms of something like grams per
day -- then vegetables are considered in bulk rather than as countable
objects.
["read less and less books"]
> So, I gather, I cannot say that (1) "I eat less and less vegetables
> these days", but must say (2) "I eat fewer and fewer vegetables these
> days".
could also say "I eat less vegetables these days", but "less and less"
would be a bit of overkill.
Saying that you eat fewer vegetables would mean that there is less
variety in your diet. That's less likely to be something one would want
to say, unless the topic is the lack of choice in the shops.
When talking about books, the unit of discourse is the individual book.
When talking about vegetables, "one vegetable" means one kind of
vegetable. If you want to talk about your consumption of vegetables in
terms of total amount -- that is, in terms of something like grams per
day -- then vegetables are considered in bulk rather than as countable
objects.
M Winther
Jul 31, 2012, 4:06:11 AM7/31/12
to
"Peter Moylan" <inv...@peter.pmoylan.org.invalid> skrev i meddelandet
news:Wu-dnQQ9LPhWEYrN...@westnet.com.au...
Mats Winther
http://home7.swipnet.se/~w-73784/index.htm
M Winther
Jul 31, 2012, 4:10:47 AM7/31/12
to
"Evan Kirshenbaum" <evan.kir...@gmail.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:4noocr...@gmail.com...
Evidently, reading "less" books is thoroughly established in the English
language.
Mats Winther
http://home7.swipnet.se/~w-73784/index.htm
ke...@cam.ac.uk
Jul 31, 2012, 4:19:01 AM7/31/12
to
>> On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 08:00:41 -0400, "Don Phillipson"
>> <e9...@SPAMBLOCK.ncf.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> The ceremonial opening theatre showed how narrowly its creator
>>> sees the mass of British history -- no Romans or Boadicea, no
>>> Robin Hood or Coeur de Lion, no Gloriana (no royalty at all),
>>> no Cavaliers and Roundheads (and no Chartists either), plenty
>>> of children but no Boy Scouts or Brownies, not least (after 15
>>> seconds of incongruous Elgar) no music later than 1980 (except for
>>> American swing in the amazing NHS tribute.)
Well, we thought it would be tactless to mention the Armada... but yes, of
>> <e9...@SPAMBLOCK.ncf.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> The ceremonial opening theatre showed how narrowly its creator
>>> sees the mass of British history -- no Romans or Boadicea, no
>>> Robin Hood or Coeur de Lion, no Gloriana (no royalty at all),
>>> no Cavaliers and Roundheads (and no Chartists either), plenty
>>> of children but no Boy Scouts or Brownies, not least (after 15
>>> seconds of incongruous Elgar) no music later than 1980 (except for
>>> American swing in the amazing NHS tribute.)
course, it was one man's eccentric selection and none the worse for that.
Wasn't there quite a lot of post-1980 music in the pop section?
Katy
James Hogg
Jul 31, 2012, 4:27:47 AM7/31/12
to
--
James
M Winther
Jul 31, 2012, 4:36:47 AM7/31/12
to
"James Hogg" <Jas....@gOUTmail.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:jv84u4$o8g$1...@dont-email.me...
"Read less books" gets 494 hits on the *last* Google page.
"Read fewer books" gets 479 hits on the *last* Google page.
The conclusion is that "read less books" is equally established as "read
fewer books".
Mats Winther
http://home7.swipnet.se/~w-73784/index.htm
news:jv84u4$o8g$1...@dont-email.me...
"Read fewer books" gets 479 hits on the *last* Google page.
The conclusion is that "read less books" is equally established as "read
fewer books".
Mats Winther
http://home7.swipnet.se/~w-73784/index.htm
Guy Barry
Jul 31, 2012, 5:49:58 AM7/31/12
to
news:501791f9$0$4134$c83e...@weathergirl-read.tele2.net...
those contexts? Interesting. For me it's just an ordinary plural count
noun in all contexts, and takes "fewer".
Are there any other plurals you would treat as mass nouns in this way?
> You, too, are getting hung up on trifles.
Does "getting hung up on trifles" simply mean "disagreeing with me"?
Debating the finer points of English usage is what this group's all about.
--
Guy Barry
>
> "Peter Moylan" <inv...@peter.pmoylan.org.invalid> skrev i meddelandet
> news:Wu-dnQQ9LPhWEYrN...@westnet.com.au...
> > On 31/07/12 17:13, M Winther wrote:
> > Saying that you eat fewer vegetables would mean that there is less
> > variety in your diet. That's less likely to be something one would
> > want
> > to say, unless the topic is the lack of choice in the shops.
> >
> > When talking about books, the unit of discourse is the individual
> > book.
> > When talking about vegetables, "one vegetable" means one kind of
> > vegetable. If you want to talk about your consumption of vegetables in
> > terms of total amount -- that is, in terms of something like grams per
> > day -- then vegetables are considered in bulk rather than as countable
> > objects.
So you would treat "vegetables" as a mass noun rather than a count noun in
> "Peter Moylan" <inv...@peter.pmoylan.org.invalid> skrev i meddelandet
> news:Wu-dnQQ9LPhWEYrN...@westnet.com.au...
> > On 31/07/12 17:13, M Winther wrote:
> > Saying that you eat fewer vegetables would mean that there is less
> > variety in your diet. That's less likely to be something one would
> > want
> > to say, unless the topic is the lack of choice in the shops.
> >
> > When talking about books, the unit of discourse is the individual
> > book.
> > When talking about vegetables, "one vegetable" means one kind of
> > vegetable. If you want to talk about your consumption of vegetables in
> > terms of total amount -- that is, in terms of something like grams per
> > day -- then vegetables are considered in bulk rather than as countable
> > objects.
those contexts? Interesting. For me it's just an ordinary plural count
noun in all contexts, and takes "fewer".
Are there any other plurals you would treat as mass nouns in this way?
> You, too, are getting hung up on trifles.
Debating the finer points of English usage is what this group's all about.
--
Guy Barry
M Winther
Jul 31, 2012, 6:11:37 AM7/31/12
to
"Guy Barry" <guy....@blueyonder.co.uk> skrev i meddelandet
news:FUNRr.394611$Ql1.3...@fx02.am4...
trifles."
It's a good expression, no? I think I'll stick with it.
Mats Winther
http://home7.swipnet.se/~w-73784
Athel Cornish-Bowden
Jul 31, 2012, 7:06:30 AM7/31/12
to
You still haven't understood the point of the original post, have you?
>
> It's a good expression, no?
No. And your question is expressed in a way no native speaker would use
> It's a good expression, no?
unless imitating French or Spanish (and doubtless other) usage.
--
athel
pensive hamster
Jul 31, 2012, 9:05:45 AM7/31/12
to
On Jul 31, 10:49 am, "Guy Barry" <guy.ba...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> "M Winther" <m...@swipnet.se> wrote in message
>
> news:501791f9$0$4134$c83e...@weathergirl-read.tele2.net...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Peter Moylan" <inva...@peter.pmoylan.org.invalid> skrev i meddelandet
http://preview.tinyurl.com/6zfknc
'Guidance from Oxford University Press says: "Less means 'not as
much'. Fewer means 'not as many'. This can be tricky when referring to
quantities. For example, we say less than six weeks, not fewer than
six weeks, because we are not referring to six individual weeks, but
to a single period of time lasting six weeks."'
> "M Winther" <m...@swipnet.se> wrote in message
>
> news:501791f9$0$4134$c83e...@weathergirl-read.tele2.net...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Peter Moylan" <inva...@peter.pmoylan.org.invalid> skrev i meddelandet
> >news:Wu-dnQQ9LPhWEYrN...@westnet.com.au...
> > > On 31/07/12 17:13, M Winther wrote:
> > > Saying that you eat fewer vegetables would mean that there is less
> > > variety in your diet. That's less likely to be something one would
> > > want
> > > to say, unless the topic is the lack of choice in the shops.
>
> > > When talking about books, the unit of discourse is the individual
> > > book.
> > > When talking about vegetables, "one vegetable" means one kind of
> > > vegetable. If you want to talk about your consumption of vegetables in
> > > terms of total amount -- that is, in terms of something like grams per
> > > day -- then vegetables are considered in bulk rather than as countable
> > > objects.
>
> So you would treat "vegetables" as a mass noun rather than a count noun in
> those contexts? Interesting. For me it's just an ordinary plural count
> noun in all contexts, and takes "fewer".
>
> Are there any other plurals you would treat as mass nouns in this way?
>
> > You, too, are getting hung up on trifles.
>
> Does "getting hung up on trifles" simply mean "disagreeing with me"?
>
> Debating the finer points of English usage is what this group's all about.
>
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2659948/Tesco-to-ditch-ten-items-or-less-sign-after-good-grammar-campaign.html
> > > On 31/07/12 17:13, M Winther wrote:
> > > Saying that you eat fewer vegetables would mean that there is less
> > > variety in your diet. That's less likely to be something one would
> > > want
> > > to say, unless the topic is the lack of choice in the shops.
>
> > > When talking about books, the unit of discourse is the individual
> > > book.
> > > When talking about vegetables, "one vegetable" means one kind of
> > > vegetable. If you want to talk about your consumption of vegetables in
> > > terms of total amount -- that is, in terms of something like grams per
> > > day -- then vegetables are considered in bulk rather than as countable
> > > objects.
>
> So you would treat "vegetables" as a mass noun rather than a count noun in
> those contexts? Interesting. For me it's just an ordinary plural count
> noun in all contexts, and takes "fewer".
>
> Are there any other plurals you would treat as mass nouns in this way?
>
> > You, too, are getting hung up on trifles.
>
> Does "getting hung up on trifles" simply mean "disagreeing with me"?
>
> Debating the finer points of English usage is what this group's all about.
>
http://preview.tinyurl.com/6zfknc
'Guidance from Oxford University Press says: "Less means 'not as
much'. Fewer means 'not as many'. This can be tricky when referring to
quantities. For example, we say less than six weeks, not fewer than
six weeks, because we are not referring to six individual weeks, but
to a single period of time lasting six weeks."'
pensive hamster
Jul 31, 2012, 9:02:27 AM7/31/12
to
On Jul 31, 11:11 am, "M Winther" <m...@swipnet.se> wrote:
>
> Indeed. Better English usage would have been: "You, too, hang up on
> trifles."
>
> It's a good expression, no? I think I'll stick with it.
>
Trifles have almost no adhesive power. For sticking, you would be much
>
> Indeed. Better English usage would have been: "You, too, hang up on
> trifles."
>
> It's a good expression, no? I think I'll stick with it.
>
better off with sticky toffee pudding.
Guy Barry
Jul 31, 2012, 12:13:50 PM7/31/12
to
"pensive hamster" <pensive...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:fffca9f5-f36c-455f...@q29g2000vby.googlegroups.com...
>
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2659948/Tesco-to-ditch-ten-items-or-l
ess-sign-after-good-grammar-campaign.html
> http://preview.tinyurl.com/6zfknc
There was a cartoon about this in Private Eye once. One checkout was
labelled "eight items or less", and the other was labelled "eight items or
fewer for pedants".
I would defend the usage "eight items or less". I think "less" is here not
an adjective but a noun, meaning "a smaller amount". I.e. "your shopping
can be eight items, or it can be less".
--
Guy Barry
R H Draney
Jul 31, 2012, 2:37:57 PM7/31/12
to
Lewis filted:
>
>In message <ji5d18dmcnn4ioerg...@4ax.com>
>Not without Tunnelbear.
Found it on theBox...will watch it when my schedule permits....r
--
Me? Sarcastic?
Yeah, right.
>
>In message <ji5d18dmcnn4ioerg...@4ax.com>
Found it on theBox...will watch it when my schedule permits....r
--
Me? Sarcastic?
Yeah, right.
Mike L
Jul 31, 2012, 5:03:55 PM7/31/12
to
On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 19:47:26 +1000, "John Holmes" <s...@sig.instead>
wrote:
>Peter Duncanson [BrE] wrote:
>> On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 08:00:41 -0400, "Don Phillipson"
>> <e9...@SPAMBLOCK.ncf.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> The ceremonial opening theatre showed how narrowly its creator
>>> sees the mass of British history -- no Romans or Boadicea, no
>>> Robin Hood or Coeur de Lion, no Gloriana (no royalty at all),
>>> no Cavaliers and Roundheads (and no Chartists either), plenty
>>> of children but no Boy Scouts or Brownies, not least (after 15
>>> seconds of incongruous Elgar) no music later than 1980 (except for
>>> American swing in the amazing NHS tribute.)
>>
>> If he'd taken a broader and fuller view of British history the event
>> would still be in progress and the final day of it would be the
>> closing ceremony.
>
>In that case, perhaps hackney-eyed was the right word. Blinkered for safety.
Chuckle.
But the segments did tend to be too long: the Great Ormond St Hosp
routine, for example, could with advantage to its own impact have
yielded a few minutes to other things.
--
Mike.
wrote:
>Peter Duncanson [BrE] wrote:
>> On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 08:00:41 -0400, "Don Phillipson"
>> <e9...@SPAMBLOCK.ncf.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> The ceremonial opening theatre showed how narrowly its creator
>>> sees the mass of British history -- no Romans or Boadicea, no
>>> Robin Hood or Coeur de Lion, no Gloriana (no royalty at all),
>>> no Cavaliers and Roundheads (and no Chartists either), plenty
>>> of children but no Boy Scouts or Brownies, not least (after 15
>>> seconds of incongruous Elgar) no music later than 1980 (except for
>>> American swing in the amazing NHS tribute.)
>>
>> would still be in progress and the final day of it would be the
>> closing ceremony.
>
>In that case, perhaps hackney-eyed was the right word. Blinkered for safety.
Chuckle.
But the segments did tend to be too long: the Great Ormond St Hosp
routine, for example, could with advantage to its own impact have
yielded a few minutes to other things.
--
Mike.
R H Draney
Jul 31, 2012, 5:43:40 PM7/31/12
to
Guy Barry filted:
it in that line with a dozen identical boxes of cookies?...r
>
>I would defend the usage "eight items or less". I think "less" is here not
>an adjective but a noun, meaning "a smaller amount". I.e. "your shopping
>can be eight items, or it can be less".
Which raises the question: if the checkout says "ten items or less", can you get
>I would defend the usage "eight items or less". I think "less" is here not
>an adjective but a noun, meaning "a smaller amount". I.e. "your shopping
>can be eight items, or it can be less".
it in that line with a dozen identical boxes of cookies?...r
Skitt
Jul 31, 2012, 6:16:05 PM7/31/12
to
and saying "there's twelve of them." I'd leave the rest in the cart or
basket, so that way there'd be only one ring-up, and that's what really
counts.
--
Skitt (SF Bay Area)
http://come.to/skitt
Peter Moylan
Jul 31, 2012, 7:13:15 PM7/31/12
to
On 31/07/12 18:27, James Hogg wrote:
page" option. Google hangs on to its too-high estimate right up to the
second-last page. If you go to the last page, get the real number, and
then hit "previous", the estimate again jumps to a high value.
> M Winther wrote:
>> "I read less books" gets 30,700 hits on Google.
>
> And that number shrinks to 110 if you go to the last page of hits.
>
It's a pity that Google searches don't have a "skip directly to last
>> "I read less books" gets 30,700 hits on Google.
>
> And that number shrinks to 110 if you go to the last page of hits.
>
page" option. Google hangs on to its too-high estimate right up to the
second-last page. If you go to the last page, get the real number, and
then hit "previous", the estimate again jumps to a high value.
Peter Moylan
Jul 31, 2012, 7:20:33 PM7/31/12
to
On 31/07/12 19:49, Guy Barry wrote:
> "M Winther" <ml...@swipnet.se> wrote in message
> news:501791f9$0$4134$c83e...@weathergirl-read.tele2.net...
>>
>> "Peter Moylan" <inv...@peter.pmoylan.org.invalid> skrev i
>> meddelandet
>> news:Wu-dnQQ9LPhWEYrN...@westnet.com.au...
>>> On 31/07/12 17:13, M Winther wrote:
>
>>> Saying that you eat fewer vegetables would mean that there is
>>> less variety in your diet. That's less likely to be something one
>>> would want to say, unless the topic is the lack of choice in the
>>> shops.
>>>
>>> When talking about books, the unit of discourse is the
>>> individual book. When talking about vegetables, "one vegetable"
>>> means one kind of vegetable. If you want to talk about your
>>> consumption of vegetables in terms of total amount -- that is, in
>>> terms of something like grams per day -- then vegetables are
>>> considered in bulk rather than as countable objects.
>
> So you would treat "vegetables" as a mass noun rather than a count
> noun in those contexts? Interesting. For me it's just an ordinary
> plural count noun in all contexts, and takes "fewer".
Perhaps it's because I like mashed potatoes, and when I eat things like
> "M Winther" <ml...@swipnet.se> wrote in message
> news:501791f9$0$4134$c83e...@weathergirl-read.tele2.net...
>>
>> "Peter Moylan" <inv...@peter.pmoylan.org.invalid> skrev i
>> meddelandet
>> news:Wu-dnQQ9LPhWEYrN...@westnet.com.au...
>>> On 31/07/12 17:13, M Winther wrote:
>
>>> Saying that you eat fewer vegetables would mean that there is
>>> less variety in your diet. That's less likely to be something one
>>> would want to say, unless the topic is the lack of choice in the
>>> shops.
>>>
>>> When talking about books, the unit of discourse is the
>>> individual book. When talking about vegetables, "one vegetable"
>>> means one kind of vegetable. If you want to talk about your
>>> consumption of vegetables in terms of total amount -- that is, in
>>> terms of something like grams per day -- then vegetables are
>>> considered in bulk rather than as countable objects.
>
> So you would treat "vegetables" as a mass noun rather than a count
> noun in those contexts? Interesting. For me it's just an ordinary
> plural count noun in all contexts, and takes "fewer".
carrots they are usually chopped up instead of presented as whole
carrots. If the consumer isn't the cook, he doesn't get to see whether
his serve of mashed potatoes was prepared from one large potato or
several small ones. For things that are visibly countable on the plate,
brussels sprouts for example, I would certainly use "fewer".
>
> Are there any other plurals you would treat as mass nouns in this
> way?
Good question. I'll have to think about it. For most mass nouns, of
> Are there any other plurals you would treat as mass nouns in this
> way?
course, we use the syntactically singular word. For now I can't think of
another plural that works like "vegetables" for me.
Peter Moylan
Jul 31, 2012, 7:22:48 PM7/31/12
to
have to nail the trifle to the wall.
Peter Moylan
Jul 31, 2012, 7:24:21 PM7/31/12
to
Peter Moylan
Jul 31, 2012, 7:30:22 PM7/31/12
to
their taste in music would be a bit more modern than that of aue
regulars. And their grasp of history correspondingly shaky.
Robin Bignall
Jul 31, 2012, 7:48:30 PM7/31/12
to
haven't bothered to turn up (yet?), their interest in the Olympics
themselves seems pretty small.
--
Robin Bignall
(BrE)
Herts, England
Robert Bannister
Jul 31, 2012, 8:56:02 PM7/31/12
to
this person now only reads the same two books over and over.
--
Robert Bannister
Robert Bannister
Jul 31, 2012, 8:59:17 PM7/31/12
to
be inadvisable.
--
Robert Bannister
Evan Kirshenbaum
Jul 31, 2012, 9:10:05 PM7/31/12
to
for me: "potatoes", "carrots", "beans", "peppers", "oats". Including
"peas", which, interestingly, started out as a mass noun--"pease",
that was reanalyzed.
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
Still with HP Labs |A handgun is like a Lawyer. You
SF Bay Area (1982-) |don't want it lying around where
Chicago (1964-1982) |the children might be exposed to
|it, but when you need one, you need
evan.kir...@gmail.com |it RIGHT NOW, and nothing else will
|do.
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ | Bill McNutt
Message has been deleted
Guy Barry
Aug 1, 2012, 2:32:08 AM8/1/12
to
"Peter Moylan" <inv...@peter.pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote in message
news:N_ednTMdXbje9YXN...@westnet.com.au...
> On 31/07/12 19:49, Guy Barry wrote:
> > So you would treat "vegetables" as a mass noun rather than a count
> > noun in those contexts? Interesting. For me it's just an ordinary
> > plural count noun in all contexts, and takes "fewer".
>
> Perhaps it's because I like mashed potatoes, and when I eat things like
> carrots they are usually chopped up instead of presented as whole
> carrots. If the consumer isn't the cook, he doesn't get to see whether
> his serve of mashed potatoes was prepared from one large potato or
> several small ones.
I would call it "mashed potato" (mass noun), irrespective of the number of
> > So you would treat "vegetables" as a mass noun rather than a count
> > noun in those contexts? Interesting. For me it's just an ordinary
> > plural count noun in all contexts, and takes "fewer".
>
> Perhaps it's because I like mashed potatoes, and when I eat things like
> carrots they are usually chopped up instead of presented as whole
> carrots. If the consumer isn't the cook, he doesn't get to see whether
> his serve of mashed potatoes was prepared from one large potato or
> several small ones.
potatoes involved. Or just "mash".
--
Guy Barry
R H Draney
Aug 1, 2012, 2:58:08 AM8/1/12
to
Skitt filted:
be taught *not* to use the "multiply item" key on the register...she did permit
herself to wave the same can over the scanner while counting to seventy-two....
I learned that the policy was changed later on, and have been in line at the
same store behind a couple who were buying 75 cans of sardines.....r
>
>Interesting question. I'd try it, handing the check-out clerk one box
>and saying "there's twelve of them." I'd leave the rest in the cart or
>basket, so that way there'd be only one ring-up, and that's what really
>counts.
I once bought 72 cans of the same beverage and discovered that the cashiers had
>Interesting question. I'd try it, handing the check-out clerk one box
>and saying "there's twelve of them." I'd leave the rest in the cart or
>basket, so that way there'd be only one ring-up, and that's what really
>counts.
be taught *not* to use the "multiply item" key on the register...she did permit
herself to wave the same can over the scanner while counting to seventy-two....
I learned that the policy was changed later on, and have been in line at the
same store behind a couple who were buying 75 cans of sardines.....r
John Holmes
Aug 1, 2012, 5:18:23 AM8/1/12
to
sensibly be treated as a mass noun, I think. Like "grains and cereals".
--
Regards
John
for mail: my initials plus a u e
at tpg dot com dot au
Dr Nick
Aug 1, 2012, 12:38:19 PM8/1/12
to
"Peter Duncanson [BrE]" <ma...@peterduncanson.net> writes:
> On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 05:39:16 -0700 (PDT), pensive hamster
> <pensive...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>On Jul 30, 12:05 pm, Guy Barry <guy.ba...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On re-reading your message, I get the impression that you think the
>>> MP was someone other than Aidan Burley. It was Aidan Burley
>>> himself who made the remarks. After he had been criticized for his
>>> comments on Twitter about multiculturalism, he was interviewed on
>>> the BBC about them and explained that he wasn't criticizing
>>> multiculturalism itself, rather the fact that the ceremony was
>>> "hackney-eyed and cliched". I can't remember the entire interview.
>>>
>>
>>I hadn't previously heard of Aidan Burley or his tweets about the
>>Olympics Opening Ceremony, so I didn't mean to suggest it was some
>>other MP, I just didn't know who it was. He is not a very well known
>>MP.
>>
>>Googling him, it seems his main claim to fame is being sacked by PM
>>David Cameron from his post as parliamentary private secretary to
>>Transport Secretary Justine Greening for attending a party where
>>guests dressed up as Nazis and drank toasts to senior figures in the
>>Nazi regime. Talk about clichéd. He was reportedly responsible for
>>hiring the uniforms.
>>
>>No wonder he thought the opening ceremony was a bit leftie.
>
> There was a member of the audience who repeatedly gave what were
> interpreted as nazi salutes.
>
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/olympics/9436019/German-anger-as-dignitary-accused-of-performing-Nazi-salute-at-opening-ceremony.html
> or http://preview.tinyurl.com/csqbjls
I did think that as I watched it. I was a bit surprised by us using
both the dambusters theme and "Enola Gay"...
> On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 05:39:16 -0700 (PDT), pensive hamster
> <pensive...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>On Jul 30, 12:05 pm, Guy Barry <guy.ba...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On re-reading your message, I get the impression that you think the
>>> MP was someone other than Aidan Burley. It was Aidan Burley
>>> himself who made the remarks. After he had been criticized for his
>>> comments on Twitter about multiculturalism, he was interviewed on
>>> the BBC about them and explained that he wasn't criticizing
>>> multiculturalism itself, rather the fact that the ceremony was
>>> "hackney-eyed and cliched". I can't remember the entire interview.
>>>
>>
>>I hadn't previously heard of Aidan Burley or his tweets about the
>>Olympics Opening Ceremony, so I didn't mean to suggest it was some
>>other MP, I just didn't know who it was. He is not a very well known
>>MP.
>>
>>Googling him, it seems his main claim to fame is being sacked by PM
>>David Cameron from his post as parliamentary private secretary to
>>Transport Secretary Justine Greening for attending a party where
>>guests dressed up as Nazis and drank toasts to senior figures in the
>>Nazi regime. Talk about clichéd. He was reportedly responsible for
>>hiring the uniforms.
>>
>>No wonder he thought the opening ceremony was a bit leftie.
>
> There was a member of the audience who repeatedly gave what were
> interpreted as nazi salutes.
>
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/olympics/9436019/German-anger-as-dignitary-accused-of-performing-Nazi-salute-at-opening-ceremony.html
> or http://preview.tinyurl.com/csqbjls
I did think that as I watched it. I was a bit surprised by us using
both the dambusters theme and "Enola Gay"...
pensive hamster
Aug 1, 2012, 1:41:57 PM8/1/12
to
On Aug 1, 12:22 am, Peter Moylan <inva...@peter.pmoylan.org.invalid>
wrote:
with some Belgian waffles, that would give the nails something to grip
on. Or wrap the whole thing up in some crepe Suzettes, and then jam it
up with some roly-poly.
wrote:
> On 31/07/12 23:02, pensive hamster wrote:
> > On Jul 31, 11:11 am, "M Winther" <m...@swipnet.se> wrote:
>
> >> Indeed. Better English usage would have been: "You, too, hang up on
> >> trifles."
>
> >> It's a good expression, no? I think I'll stick with it.
>
> > Trifles have almost no adhesive power. For sticking, you would be much
> > better off with sticky toffee pudding.
>
> Can you hang up stick toffee pudding on a trifle? I think you'd first
> have to nail the trifle to the wall.
>
Its hard to get a firm grip on a trifle. Maybe if you stiffened it up
> > On Jul 31, 11:11 am, "M Winther" <m...@swipnet.se> wrote:
>
> >> Indeed. Better English usage would have been: "You, too, hang up on
> >> trifles."
>
> >> It's a good expression, no? I think I'll stick with it.
>
> > Trifles have almost no adhesive power. For sticking, you would be much
> > better off with sticky toffee pudding.
>
> Can you hang up stick toffee pudding on a trifle? I think you'd first
> have to nail the trifle to the wall.
>
with some Belgian waffles, that would give the nails something to grip
on. Or wrap the whole thing up in some crepe Suzettes, and then jam it
up with some roly-poly.
Guy Barry
Aug 1, 2012, 1:45:36 PM8/1/12
to
news:17b29689-a193-4993...@n13g2000vby.googlegroups.com...
> Or wrap the whole thing up in some crepe Suzettes
Crepes Suzette, surely?
--
Guy Barry
> Or wrap the whole thing up in some crepe Suzettes
--
Guy Barry
Message has been deleted
Nick Spalding
Aug 1, 2012, 4:23:07 PM8/1/12
to
R H Draney wrote, in <jvak2...@drn.newsguy.com>
on 31 Jul 2012 23:58:08 -0700:
What was the rationale of that policy? In these parts the cashiers use
it for as few as two items.
--
Nick Spalding
BrE/IrE
on 31 Jul 2012 23:58:08 -0700:
it for as few as two items.
--
Nick Spalding
BrE/IrE
Mike L
Aug 1, 2012, 5:04:02 PM8/1/12
to
On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 13:06:30 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden
<athe...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>On 2012-07-31 12:11:37 +0200, "M Winther" <ml...@swipnet.se> said:
>
>>
>> "Guy Barry" <guy....@blueyonder.co.uk> skrev i meddelandet
>> news:FUNRr.394611$Ql1.3...@fx02.am4...
>>> Guy Barry
>
>You still haven't understood the point of the original post, have you?
>unless imitating French or Spanish (and doubtless other) usage.
intention of heeding.
--
Mike.
<athe...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>On 2012-07-31 12:11:37 +0200, "M Winther" <ml...@swipnet.se> said:
>
>>
>> "Guy Barry" <guy....@blueyonder.co.uk> skrev i meddelandet
>> news:FUNRr.394611$Ql1.3...@fx02.am4...
>>>
>>> "M Winther" <ml...@swipnet.se> wrote in message
>>> news:501791f9$0$4134$c83e...@weathergirl-read.tele2.net...
>>>>
>>>> "Peter Moylan" <inv...@peter.pmoylan.org.invalid> skrev i
>>>> meddelandet
>>>> news:Wu-dnQQ9LPhWEYrN...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>> On 31/07/12 17:13, M Winther wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Saying that you eat fewer vegetables would mean that there is less
>>>>> variety in your diet. That's less likely to be something one would
>>>>> want
>>>>> to say, unless the topic is the lack of choice in the shops.
>>>>>
>>>>> When talking about books, the unit of discourse is the individual
>>>>> book.
>>>>> When talking about vegetables, "one vegetable" means one kind of
>>>>> vegetable. If you want to talk about your consumption of vegetables
>>>>> in
>>>>> terms of total amount -- that is, in terms of something like grams
>>>>> per
>>>>> day -- then vegetables are considered in bulk rather than as
>>>>> countable
>>>>> objects.
>>>
>>> "M Winther" <ml...@swipnet.se> wrote in message
>>> news:501791f9$0$4134$c83e...@weathergirl-read.tele2.net...
>>>>
>>>> "Peter Moylan" <inv...@peter.pmoylan.org.invalid> skrev i
>>>> meddelandet
>>>> news:Wu-dnQQ9LPhWEYrN...@westnet.com.au...
>>>>> On 31/07/12 17:13, M Winther wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Saying that you eat fewer vegetables would mean that there is less
>>>>> variety in your diet. That's less likely to be something one would
>>>>> want
>>>>> to say, unless the topic is the lack of choice in the shops.
>>>>>
>>>>> When talking about books, the unit of discourse is the individual
>>>>> book.
>>>>> When talking about vegetables, "one vegetable" means one kind of
>>>>> vegetable. If you want to talk about your consumption of vegetables
>>>>> in
>>>>> terms of total amount -- that is, in terms of something like grams
>>>>> per
>>>>> day -- then vegetables are considered in bulk rather than as
>>>>> countable
>>>>> objects.
>>>
>>> So you would treat "vegetables" as a mass noun rather than a count
>>> noun in
>>> those contexts? Interesting. For me it's just an ordinary plural
>>> count
>>> noun in all contexts, and takes "fewer".
>>>
>>> noun in
>>> those contexts? Interesting. For me it's just an ordinary plural
>>> count
>>> noun in all contexts, and takes "fewer".
>>>
>>> Are there any other plurals you would treat as mass nouns in this way?
>>>
>>>
>>>> You, too, are getting hung up on trifles.
>>>
>>> Does "getting hung up on trifles" simply mean "disagreeing with me"?
>>>
>>> Debating the finer points of English usage is what this group's all
>>> about.
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Does "getting hung up on trifles" simply mean "disagreeing with me"?
>>>
>>> Debating the finer points of English usage is what this group's all
>>> about.
>>>
>>> Guy Barry
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Indeed. Better English usage would have been: "You, too, hang up on
>> trifles."
>
>Bollocks.
>>>
>>
>> Indeed. Better English usage would have been: "You, too, hang up on
>> trifles."
>
>
>You still haven't understood the point of the original post, have you?
>>
>> It's a good expression, no?
>
>No. And your question is expressed in a way no native speaker would use
>> It's a good expression, no?
>
>unless imitating French or Spanish (and doubtless other) usage.
>
>> I think I'll stick with it.
Then you might stop bothering people whose expert opinions you have no
>> I think I'll stick with it.
intention of heeding.
--
Mike.
R H Draney
Aug 1, 2012, 6:15:17 PM8/1/12
to
Nick Spalding filted:
The only rationale was "the boss said we have to do it this way"....
I've recently been buying a lot of beverages in near-bulk quantities, and my
usual practice is to buy several of each flavor so I can vary my choices at
home...some stores will carefully count up "six cola, six root beer, six
lemon-lime, six cherry"; others will just scan one can, hit multiply, and since
the price is the same for each the total comes out the same...the former store
always seems to have the ones I want in stock, while the other gets their
inventory hosed up and reorders flavors nobody could possibly want (there's a
flavored water that comes in several flavors I like and one or two I won't
touch; I keep finding huge stacks of "cucumber" and "hibiscus" but a shortage of
"watermelon")....r
I've recently been buying a lot of beverages in near-bulk quantities, and my
usual practice is to buy several of each flavor so I can vary my choices at
home...some stores will carefully count up "six cola, six root beer, six
lemon-lime, six cherry"; others will just scan one can, hit multiply, and since
the price is the same for each the total comes out the same...the former store
always seems to have the ones I want in stock, while the other gets their
inventory hosed up and reorders flavors nobody could possibly want (there's a
flavored water that comes in several flavors I like and one or two I won't
touch; I keep finding huge stacks of "cucumber" and "hibiscus" but a shortage of
"watermelon")....r
Message has been deleted
Robert Bannister
Aug 1, 2012, 8:50:56 PM8/1/12
to
On 2/08/12 3:43 AM, Lewis wrote:
> In message <jvak2...@drn.newsguy.com>
> allowed to use the multiple item key for more than 12 or more than 20
> identical items (varies by grocery chain).
>
> Many years ago I had to go to the store and buy 6 cases each of 6
> different types of canned soda to stock a pop machine; I found this
> excruciatingly annoying.
>
My local supermarkets have signs up specifically suggesting that if you
have a number of heavy items - which usually means cartons of soft
drinks - you should leave all but one in your trolley so you don't hurt
your back. Presumably, if you incur a back injury in the carpark while
loading the loot into your car, that doesn't matter.
--
Robert Bannister
> In message <jvak2...@drn.newsguy.com>
> R H Draney <dado...@spamcop.net> wrote:
>> Skitt filted:
>>>
>>> Interesting question. I'd try it, handing the check-out clerk one box
>>> and saying "there's twelve of them." I'd leave the rest in the cart or
>>> basket, so that way there'd be only one ring-up, and that's what really
>>> counts.
>
>> I once bought 72 cans of the same beverage and discovered that the cashiers had
>> be taught *not* to use the "multiply item" key on the register...she did permit
>> herself to wave the same can over the scanner while counting to seventy-two....
>
> Yes, they do that here, although after some complaints they are now
>> Skitt filted:
>>>
>>> Interesting question. I'd try it, handing the check-out clerk one box
>>> and saying "there's twelve of them." I'd leave the rest in the cart or
>>> basket, so that way there'd be only one ring-up, and that's what really
>>> counts.
>
>> I once bought 72 cans of the same beverage and discovered that the cashiers had
>> be taught *not* to use the "multiply item" key on the register...she did permit
>> herself to wave the same can over the scanner while counting to seventy-two....
>
> allowed to use the multiple item key for more than 12 or more than 20
> identical items (varies by grocery chain).
>
> Many years ago I had to go to the store and buy 6 cases each of 6
> different types of canned soda to stock a pop machine; I found this
> excruciatingly annoying.
>
My local supermarkets have signs up specifically suggesting that if you
have a number of heavy items - which usually means cartons of soft
drinks - you should leave all but one in your trolley so you don't hurt
your back. Presumably, if you incur a back injury in the carpark while
loading the loot into your car, that doesn't matter.
--
Robert Bannister
R H Draney
Aug 2, 2012, 12:05:38 AM8/2/12
to
Robert Bannister filted:
to the individual customer to decide just how big a case of something has to be
before it's considered a "large item"....
If the stores are going to set policies of this type, I wish they'd teach the
boxboys that two or three small shopping bags can go in the upper basket so I
don't have to stand on my head to load them into the car....r
>
>My local supermarkets have signs up specifically suggesting that if you
>have a number of heavy items - which usually means cartons of soft
>drinks - you should leave all but one in your trolley so you don't hurt
>your back. Presumably, if you incur a back injury in the carpark while
>loading the loot into your car, that doesn't matter.
The warehouse clubs have signs that say "leave large items in cart", leaving it
>My local supermarkets have signs up specifically suggesting that if you
>have a number of heavy items - which usually means cartons of soft
>drinks - you should leave all but one in your trolley so you don't hurt
>your back. Presumably, if you incur a back injury in the carpark while
>loading the loot into your car, that doesn't matter.
to the individual customer to decide just how big a case of something has to be
before it's considered a "large item"....
If the stores are going to set policies of this type, I wish they'd teach the
boxboys that two or three small shopping bags can go in the upper basket so I
don't have to stand on my head to load them into the car....r
fabzorba
Aug 2, 2012, 12:39:24 AM8/2/12
to
On Jul 31, 6:10 pm, "M Winther" <m...@swipnet.se> wrote:
>
> >> So I conclude that (3) "I read less and less books these days" is a
> >> correct sentence, because it is wholly analogous with (1).
>
> > I don't see it as "wholly analagous". Most people see each book they
> > read as an identifiable and enumerable thing.
>
>
> >> So I conclude that (3) "I read less and less books these days" is a
> >> correct sentence, because it is wholly analogous with (1).
>
> > I don't see it as "wholly analagous". Most people see each book they
> > read as an identifiable and enumerable thing.
>
> "I read less books" gets 30,700 hits on Google.
>
> Evidently, reading "less" books is thoroughly established in the English
>
> language.
Perhaps it will take over. But just checking that locution on Google
myself, I get 31,300 for "I read less books" (with quote marks in
place),and 37,300 for "I read fewer books". So perhaps there is
hope.
Last night I heard that "less and less journalists" were covering
something, and I feel that there are quite a number of reasonably
educated people now who never use "fewer" in these contexts. Perhaps,
"fewer" will go the way of "shan't" and such.
myles [I shan't be happy to see more lesses and fewer fews" paulsen
Guy Barry
Aug 2, 2012, 3:02:34 AM8/2/12
to
"Mike L" <n...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:296j18pq91am2tthi...@4ax.com...
[to Mats]
> Then you might stop bothering people whose expert opinions you have no
> intention of heeding.
I've never claimed to have an "expert opinion" on anything. Does anyone
> intention of heeding.
here?
--
Guy Barry
Message has been deleted
Katy Jennison
Aug 2, 2012, 5:38:51 AM8/2/12
to
field of expertise.
--
Katy Jennison
Nick Spalding
Aug 2, 2012, 5:39:30 AM8/2/12
to
R H Draney wrote, in <jvc9p...@drn.newsguy.com>
on 1 Aug 2012 15:15:17 -0700:
Doesn't that mess up their stock control? I thought that was linked to
the cashiers' terminals.
--
Nick Spalding
BrE/IrE
on 1 Aug 2012 15:15:17 -0700:
the cashiers' terminals.
--
Nick Spalding
BrE/IrE
Nick Spalding
Aug 2, 2012, 5:40:14 AM8/2/12
to
Lewis wrote, in <slrnk1ji7c....@mbp55.local>
on Thu, 2 Aug 2012 00:25:14 +0000 (UTC):
>In message <ru3j181jnsr7a2g06...@4ax.com>
>Beancounters at corporate headquarters who have never shopped in a
>grocery store and were terrified that 6 cases of Coke and 6 cases of
>Diet coke might be run up as 12 cases of coke, screwing up their pretty
>inventory numbers.
Indeed. See my response to RHD.
--
Nick Spalding
BrE/IrE
on Thu, 2 Aug 2012 00:25:14 +0000 (UTC):
>In message <ru3j181jnsr7a2g06...@4ax.com>
>grocery store and were terrified that 6 cases of Coke and 6 cases of
>Diet coke might be run up as 12 cases of coke, screwing up their pretty
>inventory numbers.
Indeed. See my response to RHD.
--
Nick Spalding
BrE/IrE
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages