Olympic question(s)

[Peter T. Daniels]

Whom, exactly, were the orators addressing with "Your Majesty, Your
Majesties, Your Royal Highnesses"?

Are the plural Majesties sundry royalty of other nations, or are some
people in England other than Her Majesty called Majesty? Just how many
Royal Highnesses are there? (I believe Prince Philip is one.)

NBC chose not to broadcast -- or even mention -- the administration of
the Olympic Oath. Did it take place?

(As usual, they pretended they were showing the event in real time,
even though their coverage began at 7:30 EDT and ended at midnight.)

[benl...@ihug.co.nz]

On Jul 28, 4:23 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
> Whom, exactly, were the orators addressing with "Your Majesty, Your
> Majesties, Your Royal Highnesses"?
>
> Are the plural Majesties sundry royalty of other nations, or are some
> people in England other than Her Majesty called Majesty? Just how many
> Royal Highnesses are there? (I believe Prince Philip is one.)

Yes, I think "Majesties" would have to be Royal Personages from other
countries; there is only one "Majesty" in the UK. "Highnesses" could
be in-house, but Philip was the only one actually shown.

Having spent a couple of hours watching this stuff, I found it
frustrating trying to find information on what I had been seeing.
(BBC's jumpy, scrappy editing didn't help at all.) Anybody know of a
useful, authoritative site?

> NBC chose not to broadcast -- or even mention -- the administration of
> the Olympic Oath. Did it take place?

Yes, three times as a matter of fact. The Athletes' (which mentioned
doping) was taken by a British tae-kwan-do-iste. Then there were
separate ones with different wording for judges/officials and for
trainers.

> (As usual, they pretended they were showing the event in real time,
> even though their coverage began at 7:30 EDT and ended at midnight.)

I think ours was genuinely live, from 7am to after noon, by which
point it was obviously way past Sir Paul's bedtime.

As usual the country names had some points of interest. Poor old
Macedonia had to parade under "F", because of you-know-who. But the
Taiwanese, who have to be referred to by the bizarre "Chinese
Taipei" (apparently the only thing the PRC and the rest could agree
on) were at least under "T". I forgot to notice how "Chinese Taipei"
translates in French.

And we had the "Independent Olympic Athletes" (under "I" of course) --
who turn out to be people from countries which for various reasons
don't have a functioning national Olympic Committee. There were three,
I think -- from Netherlands Antilles and South Sudan -- and they
looked delighted to be there.

[Nasti J]

On Jul 27, 10:31 pm, "benli...@ihug.co.nz" <benli...@ihug.co.nz>
wrote:

> And we had the "Independent Olympic Athletes" (under "I" of course) --
> who turn out to be people from countries which for various reasons
> don't have a functioning national Olympic Committee. There were three,
> I think -- from Netherlands Antilles and South Sudan -- and they
> looked delighted to be there.

There's actually another one who's still training for the marathon in
Flagstaff AZ and who reportedly doesn't have a visa to get to London,
but since it's on the last day of the Olympics nobody is very worried
- yet.

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 22:31:15 -0700 (PDT), "benl...@ihug.co.nz"
<benl...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:

>On Jul 28, 4:23�pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>> NBC chose not to broadcast -- or even mention -- the administration of
>> the Olympic Oath. Did it take place?
>
>Yes, three times as a matter of fact. The Athletes' (which mentioned
>doping) was taken by a British tae-kwan-do-iste. Then there were
>separate ones with different wording for judges/officials and for
>trainers.

The words of the oaths are here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympic_Oath

One thing that struck me while watching the oath-taking was the word
"Olympism" in the coach's oath.

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

[Joachim Pense]

Am 28.07.2012 11:02, schrieb Peter Duncanson [BrE]:

>
> One thing that struck me while watching the oath-taking was the word
> "Olympism" in the coach's oath.
>

One thing that struck _me_ was that in the clip showing the river Thames
(from source to East London) they played a short bit of the Sex Pistols'
"god save the Queen (she ain't no human bein')". She was present - did
she notice? Was she amused?

Actually, when the GB team walked in, we could see her watching her
fingernails, not the team.

Joachim

[Arnaud F.]

***

Maybe it's a direct calque of French,

the word "Olympisme" exists at least since 1910.

There's one reference in English: "The Outlook" Pub. Co., 1909 with Olympism.

A.

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

On Sat, 28 Jul 2012 11:11:05 +0200, Joachim Pense <sn...@pense-mainz.eu>
wrote:

It was past her bedtime - well past her bedtime.

She is a busy lady and goes to bed early. This is not a surprise but I
hadn't seen it mentioned until last year. During the Queen's official
visit to the Republic of Ireland she attended a concert. As is customary
she met all the performers afterwards. One of the peolpe was the singer
Mary Byrne who had competed on the UK TV show The X Factor.

http://preview.tinyurl.com/44dt5c3

THE Queen has revealed she records X Factor — so she NEVER misses
an episode.

Her Majesty told former contestant Mary Byrne she is a big fan of
the show.

Mary, 51, sang at a Dublin concert to round off the Royal visit to
Ireland.

The former Tesco worker — fifth in last year’s series — met the
Queen after singing U2’s classic All I Want Is You. Mary revealed:
“She said, ‘You are the lady off The X Factor. Your song was
fabulous’.

“I asked if she watched the show. She said, ‘It could be too late
for me but I do watch it the next day’. They record it for her.”

[GordonD]

<benl...@ihug.co.nz> wrote in message
news:1875499b-5b9c-473d...@h8g2000pbt.googlegroups.com...

> On Jul 28, 4:23 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > Whom, exactly, were the orators addressing with "Your Majesty, Your
> > Majesties, Your Royal Highnesses"?
> >
> > Are the plural Majesties sundry royalty of other nations, or are some
> > people in England other than Her Majesty called Majesty? Just how many
> > Royal Highnesses are there? (I believe Prince Philip is one.)
>
> Yes, I think "Majesties" would have to be Royal Personages from other
> countries; there is only one "Majesty" in the UK. "Highnesses" could
> be in-house, but Philip was the only one actually shown.

Kate and William were there, along with Harry the Half-Blood Prince.
--
Gordon Davie
Edinburgh, Scotland

"Slipped the surly bonds of Earth...to touch the face of God."

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

On Sat, 28 Jul 2012 12:45:57 +0100, "GordonD" <g.d...@btinternet.com>
wrote:

><benl...@ihug.co.nz> wrote in message
>news:1875499b-5b9c-473d...@h8g2000pbt.googlegroups.com...
>> On Jul 28, 4:23 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> > Whom, exactly, were the orators addressing with "Your Majesty, Your
>> > Majesties, Your Royal Highnesses"?
>> >
>> > Are the plural Majesties sundry royalty of other nations, or are some
>> > people in England other than Her Majesty called Majesty? Just how many
>> > Royal Highnesses are there? (I believe Prince Philip is one.)
>>
>> Yes, I think "Majesties" would have to be Royal Personages from other
>> countries; there is only one "Majesty" in the UK. "Highnesses" could
>> be in-house, but Philip was the only one actually shown.
>
>
>Kate and William were there, along with Harry the Half-Blood Prince.

Is there any evidence that Harry is "half-blood"?

I've heard jokes about his gingery hair. However, he shares that with
his uncle Charles (Spencer).

Harry:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d1/Prince_Harry%27s_Speech.jpg

His uncle:
http://www.londonspeakerbureau.co.uk/managed/images/speakers/351--Charles-Spencer.jpg

[Harlan Messinger]

On 7/28/2012 1:31 AM, benl...@ihug.co.nz wrote:
> On Jul 28, 4:23 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> Whom, exactly, were the orators addressing with "Your Majesty, Your
>> Majesties, Your Royal Highnesses"?
>>
>> Are the plural Majesties sundry royalty of other nations, or are some
>> people in England other than Her Majesty called Majesty? Just how many
>> Royal Highnesses are there? (I believe Prince Philip is one.)
>
> Yes, I think "Majesties" would have to be Royal Personages from other
> countries; there is only one "Majesty" in the UK. "Highnesses" could
> be in-house, but Philip was the only one actually shown.
>
> Having spent a couple of hours watching this stuff, I found it
> frustrating trying to find information on what I had been seeing.
> (BBC's jumpy, scrappy editing didn't help at all.) Anybody know of a
> useful, authoritative site?

No, but I can tell you about the flying pig in the opening Thames montage.

>
>> NBC chose not to broadcast -- or even mention -- the administration of
>> the Olympic Oath. Did it take place?
>
> Yes, three times as a matter of fact. The Athletes' (which mentioned
> doping) was taken by a British tae-kwan-do-iste. Then there were
> separate ones with different wording for judges/officials and for
> trainers.
>
>> (As usual, they pretended they were showing the event in real time,
>> even though their coverage began at 7:30 EDT and ended at midnight.)
>
> I think ours was genuinely live, from 7am to after noon, by which
> point it was obviously way past Sir Paul's bedtime.
>
> As usual the country names had some points of interest. Poor old
> Macedonia had to parade under "F", because of you-know-who. But the
> Taiwanese, who have to be referred to by the bizarre "Chinese
> Taipei" (apparently the only thing the PRC and the rest could agree
> on) were at least under "T". I forgot to notice how "Chinese Taipei"
> translates in French.

The explanations for Macedonia being filed under F, as well as for
putting Democratic People's Republic of Korea and Democratic Republic of
the Congo under D, make no more sense than putting United States of
Mexico under U or People's Republic of China under P.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Saturday, July 28, 2012 1:31:15 AM UTC-4, benl...@ihug.co.nz wrote:
> On Jul 28, 4:23 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> > Whom, exactly, were the orators addressing with "Your Majesty, Your
> > Majesties, Your Royal Highnesses"?
>
> >
>
> > Are the plural Majesties sundry royalty of other nations, or are some
> > people in England other than Her Majesty called Majesty? Just how many
> > Royal Highnesses are there? (I believe Prince Philip is one.)
>
>
>
> Yes, I think "Majesties" would have to be Royal Personages from other
> countries; there is only one "Majesty" in the UK. "Highnesses" could
> be in-house, but Philip was the only one actually shown.

Not Charles, William, and maybe Henry??

> Having spent a couple of hours watching this stuff, I found it
> frustrating trying to find information on what I had been seeing.
> (BBC's jumpy, scrappy editing didn't help at all.) Anybody know of a
> useful, authoritative site?

nbcolympics.com will be streaming everything, they say.

> > NBC chose not to broadcast -- or even mention -- the administration of
> > the Olympic Oath. Did it take place?
>
>
>
> Yes, three times as a matter of fact. The Athletes' (which mentioned
> doping) was taken by a British tae-kwan-do-iste. Then there were
> separate ones with different wording for judges/officials and for
> trainers.
>

:Trainers" would be new, vis-a-vis previous ones.

>
> > (As usual, they pretended they were showing the event in real time,
> > even though their coverage began at 7:30 EDT and ended at midnight.)
>
> I think ours was genuinely live, from 7am to after noon, by which
> point it was obviously way past Sir Paul's bedtime.

Bob Costas and Matt Lauer agreed that he was "overcome with emotion" on seeing the crowds and so missed the first couple of lines.

> As usual the country names had some points of interest. Poor old
> Macedonia had to parade under "F", because of you-know-who. But the
> Taiwanese, who have to be referred to by the bizarre "Chinese
> Taipei" (apparently the only thing the PRC and the rest could agree
> on) were at least under "T". I forgot to notice how "Chinese Taipei"
> translates in French.

They noted that Ghana is in the same alphabetical spot as Gold Coast would have been. Cote d'Ivoire was under C. They missed the /w/. Cape Verde rhymed with "bird" -- but they got Kiribati right.

> And we had the "Independent Olympic Athletes" (under "I" of course) --
> who turn out to be people from countries which for various reasons
> don't have a functioning national Olympic Committee. There were three,
> I think -- from Netherlands Antilles and South Sudan -- and they
> looked delighted to be there.

The three Former Netherlands Antilleans were there, but the one South Sudanian is still in Flagstaff, AZ with visa problems -- but he's a marathoner so doesn't have to actually get there until the last day. (Sounds like NBC knows more than NZ BBC!)

Aruba had a contingent; why not "Bonaire and Curacao" if they don't whnt "Netherlands" in their name?

British Virgin Islands under V, but (US) Virgin Islands under V. They didn't note that Samoa used to be all the way in the back under Western Samoa.

[Peter T. Daniels]

B

[GordonD]

"Peter Duncanson [BrE]" <ma...@peterduncanson.net> wrote in message
news:qql7181f58mvfk0cj...@4ax.com...

> On Sat, 28 Jul 2012 12:45:57 +0100, "GordonD" <g.d...@btinternet.com>
> wrote:
>
>><benl...@ihug.co.nz> wrote in message
>>news:1875499b-5b9c-473d...@h8g2000pbt.googlegroups.com...
>>> On Jul 28, 4:23 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>> > Whom, exactly, were the orators addressing with "Your Majesty, Your
>>> > Majesties, Your Royal Highnesses"?
>>> >
>>> > Are the plural Majesties sundry royalty of other nations, or are some
>>> > people in England other than Her Majesty called Majesty? Just how many
>>> > Royal Highnesses are there? (I believe Prince Philip is one.)
>>>
>>> Yes, I think "Majesties" would have to be Royal Personages from other
>>> countries; there is only one "Majesty" in the UK. "Highnesses" could
>>> be in-house, but Philip was the only one actually shown.
>>
>>
>>Kate and William were there, along with Harry the Half-Blood Prince.
>
> Is there any evidence that Harry is "half-blood"?

Of course there is. The URL with the proof is...hang on, there's someone at
the door...

[Jerry Friedman]

On Jul 27, 10:23 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
> Whom, exactly, were the orators addressing with "Your Majesty, Your
> Majesties, Your Royal Highnesses"?
>
> Are the plural Majesties sundry royalty of other nations, or are some
> people in England other than Her Majesty called Majesty? Just how many
> Royal Highnesses are there? (I believe Prince Philip is one.)

...

For the UK, with help from Wikipedia, I can find Philip; Charles and
Camilla, Anne, Andrew, Edward and Sophie; William and Kate, Harry.
There seems to be some question about whether T. R. H. Prince and
Princess Edward's children are "technically" Royal Highnesses.

I know nothing about the use of this style in other royal families or
who might have been at the Olympic opening ceremonies.

--
Jerry Friedman

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

On Sat, 28 Jul 2012 06:26:09 -0700 (PDT), Jerry Friedman
<jerry_f...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Jul 27, 10:23�pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> Whom, exactly, were the orators addressing with "Your Majesty, Your
>> Majesties, Your Royal Highnesses"?
>>
>> Are the plural Majesties sundry royalty of other nations, or are some
>> people in England other than Her Majesty called Majesty? Just how many
>> Royal Highnesses are there? (I believe Prince Philip is one.)
>...
>
>For the UK, with help from Wikipedia, I can find Philip; Charles and
>Camilla, Anne, Andrew, Edward and Sophie; William and Kate, Harry.
>There seems to be some question about whether T. R. H. Prince and
>Princess Edward's children are "technically" Royal Highnesses.

The title Royal Highness is granted specifically. It is not automatic.

As for Prince Edward's children:
http://www.royal.gov.uk/ThecurrentRoyalFamily/TheEarlofWessex/Marriageandfamily.aspx

Prince Edward ...
Upon marriage Miss Sophie Rhys-Jones became known as HRH The
Countess of Wessex.

Their Royal Highnesses have a young daughter, Louise, ... and a baby
son, [James]...

The couple decided, with The Queen's agreement, that their children
would use the courtesy titles as sons or daughters of an Earl rather
than the style Prince or Princess.

Hence: Lady Louise Windsor and James, Viscount Severn.

>
>I know nothing about the use of this style in other royal families or
>who might have been at the Olympic opening ceremonies.

--

[Whiskers]

On 2012-07-28, benl...@ihug.co.nz <benl...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
> On Jul 28, 4:23 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:

[...]

> Having spent a couple of hours watching this stuff, I found it
> frustrating trying to find information on what I had been seeing.
> (BBC's jumpy, scrappy editing didn't help at all.) Anybody know of a
> useful, authoritative site?

[...]

The BBC <http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/olympics/18906710?date=20120725>

The official Olympic Games web site
<http://www.london2012.com/spectators/ceremonies/opening-ceremony/>

I don't know of a written description and explanation of every detail;
perhaps the organisers will release something now that the secrets have
been revealed.

I'm sure the Brits here will be happy to offer explanations for
particular aspects or features.

I'm curious as to what was happening in the stadium while the BBC was
broadcasting footage from elsewhere.

--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~

[Jerry Friedman]

On Jul 28, 7:53 am, "Peter Duncanson [BrE]" <m...@peterduncanson.net>
wrote:

> On Sat, 28 Jul 2012 06:26:09 -0700 (PDT), Jerry Friedman

...

> >There seems to be some question about whether T. R. H. Prince and
> >Princess Edward's children are "technically" Royal Highnesses.
>
> The title Royal Highness is granted specifically. It is not automatic.
>

> As for Prince Edward's children:http://www.royal.gov.uk/ThecurrentRoyalFamily/TheEarlofWessex/Marriag...

>
>     Prince Edward ...
>     Upon marriage Miss Sophie Rhys-Jones became known as HRH The
>     Countess of Wessex.
>
>     Their Royal Highnesses have a young daughter, Louise, ... and a baby
>     son, [James]...
>
>     The couple decided, with The Queen's agreement, that their children
>     would use the courtesy titles as sons or daughters of an Earl rather
>     than the style Prince or Princess.
>
> Hence: Lady Louise Windsor and James, Viscount Severn.

Wikipedia says, "Letters patent issued in 1917 (and still remaining in
force today) assign a princely status and the style of Royal Highness
to all male-line grandchildren of a monarch. Therefore, all else being
equal [sic], James would have been styled as His Royal Highness Prince
James of Wessex.[9] However, when his parents married, the Queen, via
a Buckingham Palace press release, announced that (in hopes of
avoiding some of the burdens associated with royal titles) their
children would be styled as the children of an earl, rather than as
princes or princesses. The eldest son of an earl is customarily
accorded one of his father's subsidiary titles by courtesy, thus James
is named as [sic] Viscount Severn, and court communications never
refer to him as a prince of the United Kingdom, but simply as Viscount
Severn.[10] There are two opposing opinions as to whether or not James
is "legally" a prince and His Royal Highness: Some experts consider
the Queen's press release to not have enough legal force to override
the 1917 letters patent, whereas other experts contend that the
Queen's will, however expressed, is law in matters of royal titles and
styles.[11][12]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James,_Viscount_Severn

For what that and the cited sources are worth. Note 12 (which is not
from an expert) refers to this as "the Wessex question".

Obaue: "Sic"s mine. I don't see "all else being equal" as having the
meaning of "in the expected course of things" or "if nothing relevant
had been done", as it seems to here. Did it acquire that meaning
while I wasn't looking?

And I just can't deal with "named as" where "named" would work.
Anyway, shouldn't it be "titled"? Besides, that sentence is a comma
splice.

--
Jerry Friedman isn't getting started on "still remaining in force
today".

[Jerry Friedman]

On Jul 28, 9:43 am, Jerry Friedman <jerry_fried...@yahoo.com> wrote:
...
"the Wessex question".
...

P.S.: Stan Brown should be along soon with some helpful comments.

--
Jerry Friedman

[Guy Barry]

"Lewis" <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote in message
news:slrnk18i13....@mbp55.local...
> In message <a7i1no...@mid.individual.net>

> GordonD <g.d...@btinternet.com> wrote:

> > Kate and William were there, along with Harry the Half-Blood Prince.
>

> When did HArry pick up that nickname? And why?

I'd never actually heard it before, but I'd guess it's partly a J.K. Rowling
reference and partly a reference to the long-established rumour that Charles
isn't his father.

--
Guy Barry

[benl...@ihug.co.nz]

Aruba seceded from the Neth.Ant. back in 1986. What has been going on
with the rest of them recently, I am no more able to explain after a
brief read of the Wiki article. Very confusing. No wonder they
couldn't get their Olympic act together.

[Harlan Messinger]

On 7/28/2012 8:51 AM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
> They noted that Ghana is in the same alphabetical spot as Gold Coast
> would have been. Cote d'Ivoire was under C. They missed the /w/.

Indeed, they said it as as though it were "divorce" without the /s/.

> Cape
> Verde rhymed with "bird"

That's the correct pronunciation.

> -- but they got Kiribati right.
>
>> And we had the "Independent Olympic Athletes" (under "I" of course)
>> -- who turn out to be people from countries which for various
>> reasons don't have a functioning national Olympic Committee. There
>> were three, I think -- from Netherlands Antilles and South Sudan --
>> and they looked delighted to be there.
>
> The three Former Netherlands Antilleans were there, but the one South
> Sudanian is still in Flagstaff, AZ with visa problems -- but he's a
> marathoner so doesn't have to actually get there until the last day.
> (Sounds like NBC knows more than NZ BBC!)
>
> Aruba had a contingent; why not "Bonaire and Curacao" if they don't
> whnt "Netherlands" in their name?

It isn't a matter of not wanting "Netherlands" in their name, and there
wouldn't be any political basis for "Bonaire and Curacao" as a unit
because, since 2010, they are no longer even sibling political entities.

The Kingdom of the Netherlands now consists of four "countries"
("landen"): The Netherlands proper, Aruba, Curacao, and Sint-Maarten.
(Comparable, I suppose, to the UK and its four countries as highlighted
early in the ceremony.) Bonaire, Sint Eustatius, and Saba are now
"special municipalities" of The Netherlands proper--independently of
each other, not under a single political entity, comparable to the
Netherlands Antilles, sitting between them and The Netherlands.

[Harlan Messinger]

On 7/28/2012 6:13 PM, Harlan Messinger wrote:
> On 7/28/2012 8:51 AM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>
>> They noted that Ghana is in the same alphabetical spot as Gold Coast
>> would have been. Cote d'Ivoire was under C. They missed the /w/.
>
> Indeed, they said it as as though it were "divorce" without the /s/.
>
>> Cape
>> Verde rhymed with "bird"
>
> That's the correct pronunciation.
>
>> -- but they got Kiribati right.

A person from Gabon was described as "Gabonian".

[annily]

I got the Rowling reference, but I don't think I'd heard of that rumour
before.

[Peter T. Daniels]

And why not? What do you call someone from Oregon?

[Harlan Messinger]

For the same reason "Gaboner", "Gabonite", "Oregonese", "Oregoner",
"Oregonite", "Bostonese", "Bostoner", "Bostonite", "Londonese",
"Londonite", "Lebanonese", "Lebanonian", "Lebanonite", "Lebanoner",
"Ammonian", "Ammonese", and "Ammoner" are all incorrect, despite the
correctness of Oregonian, Gabonese, Londoner, and Ammonite: because they
aren't all treated as following a common rule. (And Lord knows why you
would assume a priori that Gabon, stressed on the second syllable, would
follow the same rule as Oregon, stressed on the first syllable, anyway.)

[Guy Barry]

"annily" <ann...@annily.invalid> wrote in message
news:5014a48a$1...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...

There have been suggestions that James Hewitt is Harry's father, although he
has publicly denied it - he says that the relationship didn't start until
after Harry was born. I'm not well up enough with Royal gossip to judge.

--
Guy Barry

[Arnaud F.]

***

One of our caricaturists over here disseminates the rumour that Giscard d'Estaing is the father... :)

http://www.20minutes.fr/monde/349255-Monde-Romance-Giscard-d-Estaing-Lady-Di-la-presse-britannique-mene-l-enquete.php

The olympic games of gossip...

A.

[CDB]

On Jul 28, 7:45 am, "GordonD" <g.da...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> <benli...@ihug.co.nz> wrote in message

>
> news:1875499b-5b9c-473d...@h8g2000pbt.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Jul 28, 4:23 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > > Whom, exactly, were the orators addressing with "Your Majesty, Your
> > > Majesties, Your Royal Highnesses"?
>

[...]

>
> Kate and William were there, along with Harry the Half-Blood Prince.
> --

What are you suggesting? He's the spit of the late Queen Mother.

[Peter T. Daniels]

> follow the same rule as Oregon, stressed on the first syllable, anyway.)-

So they should have said "Gabonaise"?

[GordonD]

"Guy Barry" <guy....@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1UXQr.261343$Hs2.2...@fx27.am4...

Right on both counts. I suspect the actual term may be original with me.
<modest cough>

Though of course others have probably come up with it independently.

[CDB]

On Jul 29, 7:38 am, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:

> Humans usually have two parents.

But usually only the father`s identity is in question. He didn`t get
that cheerful Scottishness, or his resemblance to Philip of Greece,
come to that, from his mum`s side.

[Harlan Messinger]

The English term is "Gabonese".

[Peter T. Daniels]

> The English term is "Gabonese".-

Did anyone misunderstand "Gabonian," even you?

What is a native of Connecticut called?

[Peter T. Daniels]

> come to that, from his mum`s side.-

I don't know what "cheerful Scottishness" may be, but it doesn't sound
like something heritable. If he was brought up in Scotland, or
surrounded by Scots, he might have acquired "cheerful Scottishness"
the way Scots do (if there is such a thing; usually the adjective
applied to Scots is "dour").

[Ian Noble]

On Sat, 28 Jul 2012 10:02:18 +0100, "Peter Duncanson [BrE]"
<ma...@peterduncanson.net> wrote:

>On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 22:31:15 -0700 (PDT), "benl...@ihug.co.nz"
><benl...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
>
>>On Jul 28, 4:23�pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>

>>> NBC chose not to broadcast -- or even mention -- the administration of
>>> the Olympic Oath. Did it take place?
>>
>>Yes, three times as a matter of fact. The Athletes' (which mentioned
>>doping) was taken by a British tae-kwan-do-iste. Then there were
>>separate ones with different wording for judges/officials and for
>>trainers.
>

>The words of the oaths are here:
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympic_Oath
>
>One thing that struck me while watching the oath-taking was the word
>"Olympism" in the coach's oath.

What struck me was that the three oath-takers seemed to have been
deliberately chosen for strong, not particularly gentle-on-the-ears,
accents.

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

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Jul 29, 4:08 pm, Ian Noble <ipno...@killspam.o2.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Jul 2012 10:02:18 +0100, "Peter Duncanson [BrE]"

> <m...@peterduncanson.net> wrote:

> >On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 22:31:15 -0700 (PDT), "benli...@ihug.co.nz"
> ><benli...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
> >>On Jul 28, 4:23 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> >>> NBC chose not to broadcast -- or even mention -- the administration of
> >>> the Olympic Oath. Did it take place?
>
> >>Yes, three times as a matter of fact. The Athletes' (which mentioned
> >>doping) was taken by a British tae-kwan-do-iste. Then there were
> >>separate ones with different wording for judges/officials and for
> >>trainers.
>
> >The words of the oaths are here:
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympic_Oath
>
> >One thing that struck me while watching the oath-taking was the word
> >"Olympism" in the coach's oath.
>
> What struck me was that the three oath-takers seemed to have been
> deliberately chosen for strong, not particularly gentle-on-the-ears,
> accents.

What would make an accent "gentle on the ears"?

[Harlan Messinger]

I was writing in response to an email in which YOU were nitpicking over
usage and pronunciation. I pointed out a mistake YOU made, FOR YOUR
INFORMATION, and you ignored it. Then I added a mistake I heard
*comparable to the examples you had pointed out*, and suddenly you're
all about defending it. You try to reason your way to it via a bad and
irrelevant analogy. You brought up comprehensibility when it was beside
the point (did anyone have any trouble understanding "Cote d'Ivore" and
would "Kiriba-tee" have caused a comprehension problem?). You invoked
Connecticut when it has nothing to do with anything that had preceded.

You will lose no opportunity, however tenuous, to manufacture an excuse
to argue over nothing, and now we see that this compulsion is so
overwhelming for you that it motivates you even when you are in effect
arguing with yourself. Are you incapable of saying "Good catch, I'd
missed that one" or "Oh, I hadn't realized the term is 'Gabonese',
thanks for the information" like a normal human being? Or would it kill
you to pass up any pretext to be an insufferable crank?

I take it back: You passed up the opportunity to wave your hands and
insist that the pronunciation of Cape Verde was wrong. But, really, your
habit is so bad that I'm going to assume either that you overlooked it,
or else that you don't know anything about Portuguese and couldn't think
up a way even to pretend to have something valid to say in contradiction.

[António Marques]

Hey, it's Cabo Verde /'kabu 'verd+/ ['kabu 'verd+], creole [kabu'ver]. It
doesn't rhyme with bird or any other English word, actually.

[Harlan Messinger]

Oh, come on, Antonio! *I* know what it is in Portuguese. We were talking
about English (i.e., with "Cape" instead of "Cabo").

With the late Cesaria Evora in mind, I was even looking recently to see
if Cape Verde would be an interesting place to visit, and how accessible
it would be, but while there are supposedly nonstop flights from Boston,
the website of the Cape Verde airline that provides that service ("Cabo
Verde Airlines", perversely enough; "O prazer de viajar bem") has been
"em manutenção" for weeks.

[annily]

Ah, the James Hewitt thing does ring a bell now.

[António Marques]

That's why I kept quiet when you first said 'Vird' was the correct
pronunciation. But then your paragraph above muddied the matters.

> With the late Cesaria Evora in mind, I was even looking recently to see if
> Cape Verde would be an interesting place to visit, and how accessible it
> would be, but while there are supposedly nonstop flights from Boston, the
> website of the Cape Verde airline that provides that service ("Cabo Verde
> Airlines", perversely enough; "O prazer de viajar bem") has been "em
> manutenção" for weeks.

Keep in mind that portuguese is spoken there as a foreign language (despite
the authorities having always behaved as if it were the native language).

[Harlan Messinger]

On 7/29/2012 9:47 PM, António Marques wrote:

> Harlan Messinger wrote (30-07-2012 02:04):

>> With the late Cesaria Evora in mind, I was even looking recently to
>> see if
>> Cape Verde would be an interesting place to visit, and how accessible it
>> would be, but while there are supposedly nonstop flights from Boston, the
>> website of the Cape Verde airline that provides that service ("Cabo Verde
>> Airlines", perversely enough; "O prazer de viajar bem") has been "em
>> manutenção" for weeks.
>
> Keep in mind that portuguese is spoken there as a foreign language
> (despite the authorities having always behaved as if it were the native
> language).

Understood--and it is, reportedly, the official language. But it seems
that it isn't a matter of the residents speaking an indigenous language
that predated the arrival of the Portuguese: they natively speak a
creole. According to Wikipedia, the origin of their language is highly
speculative.

[Robert Bannister]

Not too pronounced, if you will excuse the word play.

--
Robert Bannister

[Robert Bannister]

On 30/07/12 6:36 AM, Lewis wrote:
> In message <16c851af-8977-42d8...@a16g2000vby.googlegroups.com>

> Standard BBC?
>

Now, that would be silly. Some sort of mid-Atlantic accent would be
fine. Pity more people don't live there.

--
Robert Bannister

[António Marques]

Indeed, and there was nobody on the islands before the portuguese got there.

> According to Wikipedia, the origin of their language is highly speculative.

Cape Verde is supposed to be deeply entwined with Guinea, and yet the people
don't look the least alike and the creoles are different.

I know next to nothing about guinean creole. I do know that capeverdean is
similar enough to portuguese in lexicon and phonology for native speakers of
it not having much of an accent after only a couple of years living in Portugal.

[pauljk]

"Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:e480be2f-4768-4d80...@f30g2000vbz.googlegroups.com...

> On Jul 29, 7:15 am, CDB <bellemar...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Humans usually have two parents.

What's the relevance of this remark???

pjk

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Jul 29, 11:19 pm, "pauljk" <paul.kr...@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
> "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote in messagenews:e480be2f-4768-4d80...@f30g2000vbz.googlegroups.com...

See, if you used google groups, you would never have seen it!

[Guy Barry]

"Robert Bannister" <rob...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:a7mbs0...@mid.individual.net...

> Now, that would be silly. Some sort of mid-Atlantic accent would be
> fine. Pity more people don't live there.

I don't think I've ever heard anyone from Tristan da Cunha.

--
Guy Barry

[Guy Barry]

"pauljk" <paul....@xtra.co.nz> wrote in message
news:jv4ug3$n3i$1...@dont-email.me...

Maybe he thinks that Diana wasn't Harry's mother.

--
Guy Barry

[R H Draney]

Guy Barry filted:

Not a lot of people can holler that loud....r


--
Me? Sarcastic?
Yeah, right.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Jul 30, 3:20 am, "Guy Barry" <guy.ba...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> "pauljk" <paul.kr...@xtra.co.nz> wrote in message
>
> news:jv4ug3$n3i$1...@dont-email.me...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote in message

> >news:e480be2f-4768-4d80...@f30g2000vbz.googlegroups.com...
> > > On Jul 29, 7:15 am, CDB <bellemar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> On Jul 28, 7:45 am, "GordonD" <g.da...@btinternet.com> wrote:>
> > >> <benli...@ihug.co.nz> wrote in message
>
> >news:1875499b-5b9c-473d...@h8g2000pbt.googlegroups.com...
>
> > >> > > On Jul 28, 4:23 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net>
> wrote:
> > >> > > > Whom, exactly, were the orators addressing with "Your Majesty,
> Your
> > >> > > > Majesties, Your Royal Highnesses"?
>
> > >> [...]
>
> > >> > Kate and William were there, along with Harry the Half-Blood Prince.
> > >> > --
>
> > >> What are you suggesting?  He's the spit of the late Queen Mother.
>
> > > Humans usually have two parents.
>
> > What's the relevance of this remark???
>
> Maybe he thinks that Diana wasn't Harry's mother.

Well, where's the proof of that?

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

Mellifluousness.

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

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Jul 30, 9:07 am, "Peter Duncanson [BrE]" <m...@peterduncanson.net>
wrote:

Who gets to say what's "mellifluous"?

Come to think of it, "honeyed words" aren't always a good thing ...

[Robert Bannister]

They've got that funny Archers' accent, a bit like Norfolk Islanders.


--
Robert Bannister

[Mike L]

On 30 Jul 2012 02:17:45 -0700, R H Draney <dado...@spamcop.net>
wrote:

Actually, there was a Radio 4 prog about them not too long
ago...unless it was the "Saints" of St Helena. The accents were
noticeable, but not strong - or, unfortunately, memorable. HM
Government at one stage wanted to evacuate the lot to Britain because
they were alleged to be showing signs of inbreeding.

--
Mike.

[Steve Hayes]

They were evacuated because of a volcanic eruption some years ago, but when
things calmed down most of them went back.


--
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

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Jul 31, 6:18 pm, Mike L <n...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> On 30 Jul 2012 02:17:45 -0700, R H Draney <dadoc...@spamcop.net>
> wrote:
>
> >Guy Barry filted:
>
> >>"Robert Bannister" <robb...@bigpond.com> wrote in message

> >>news:a7mbs0...@mid.individual.net...
>
> >>> Now, that would be silly. Some sort of mid-Atlantic accent would be
> >>> fine. Pity more people don't live there.
>
> >>I don't think I've ever heard anyone from Tristan da Cunha.
>
> >Not a lot of people can holler that loud....r
>
> Actually, there was a Radio 4 prog about them not too long
> ago...unless it was the "Saints" of St Helena. The accents were
> noticeable, but not strong - or, unfortunately, memorable. HM
> Government at one stage wanted to evacuate the lot to Britain because
> they were alleged to be showing signs of inbreeding.

See "St Helenian English" (pp. 224-44) and "Tristan da Cunha
English" (pp. 245-60), both by Daniel Schreier, in *The Lesser-Known
Varieties of English: An Introduction*, ed. by Daniel Schreier, Peter
Trudgill, Edgar W. Schneider, and Jeffrey P. Williams (Cambridge
University Press, 2010).

[benl...@ihug.co.nz]

On Wednesday, August 1, 2012 3:26:58 PM UTC+12, Steve Hayes wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 23:18:01 +0100, Mike L <n...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
>
> >On 30 Jul 2012 02:17:45 -0700, R H Draney <dado...@spamcop.net>
>
> >wrote:
>
> >
>
> >>Guy Barry filted:
>
> >>>
>
> >>>
>
> >>>"Robert Bannister" <rob...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
>
> >>>news:a7mbs0...@mid.individual.net...
>
> >>>
>
> >>>> Now, that would be silly. Some sort of mid-Atlantic accent would be
>
> >>>> fine. Pity more people don't live there.
>
> >>>
>
> >>>I don't think I've ever heard anyone from Tristan da Cunha.
>
> >>
>
> >>Not a lot of people can holler that loud....r
>
> >
>
> >Actually, there was a Radio 4 prog about them not too long
>
> >ago...unless it was the "Saints" of St Helena. The accents were
>
> >noticeable, but not strong - or, unfortunately, memorable. HM
>
> >Government at one stage wanted to evacuate the lot to Britain because
>
> >they were alleged to be showing signs of inbreeding.
>
>
>
> They were evacuated because of a volcanic eruption some years ago, but when
>
> things calmed down most of them went back.
>

That was 1961-63. While they were in England, the folklorists Maud Karpeles and Peter Kennedy recorded a lot of their folk music and a fair amount of talk about traditions, mostly from Mary Swain. There's an interview with her here, after she was back home.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezTy_X4IC2c

[Guy Barry]

"Steve Hayes" <haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote in message
news:he8h18h5777ns191l...@4ax.com...

> On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 23:18:01 +0100, Mike L <n...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

[Tristan da Cunha]

> >Actually, there was a Radio 4 prog about them not too long
> >ago...unless it was the "Saints" of St Helena. The accents were
> >noticeable, but not strong - or, unfortunately, memorable. HM
> >Government at one stage wanted to evacuate the lot to Britain because
> >they were alleged to be showing signs of inbreeding.
>
> They were evacuated because of a volcanic eruption some years ago, but
when
> things calmed down most of them went back.

I thought that was Montserrat. Or am I confusing separate incidents?

--
Guy Barry

[Steve Hayes]

On Wed, 1 Aug 2012 08:14:56 +0100, "Guy Barry" <guy....@blueyonder.co.uk>
wrote:

Possibly. I was referring to this one, which led to some exogamy.

http://www.historytoday.com/richard-cavendish/evacuation-tristan-da-cunha

[Guy Barry]

"Steve Hayes" <haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote in message

news:fesh1895egc1m0bf6...@4ax.com...

> On Wed, 1 Aug 2012 08:14:56 +0100, "Guy Barry"
<guy....@blueyonder.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Steve Hayes" <haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote in message
> >news:he8h18h5777ns191l...@4ax.com...

[The inhabitants of Tristan da Cunha]

> >> They were evacuated because of a volcanic eruption some years ago, but
> >when
> >> things calmed down most of them went back.
> >
> >I thought that was Montserrat. Or am I confusing separate incidents?
>
> Possibly. I was referring to this one, which led to some exogamy.
>
> http://www.historytoday.com/richard-cavendish/evacuation-tristan-da-cunha

Ah, different time-scale (1961). The Montserrat eruption was much more
recent, in the mid-90s.

--
Guy Barry

[António Marques]

Well, that's what would actually make him sort of 'half-blood'; if he were
not Charles's child, he would be more of a 'mudblood' or muggle, even.
But see, that's why such stuff is not to be analyzed.

[Yusuf B Gursey]

On Jul 28, 8:40 am, Harlan Messinger <h.rem...@gavelcade.com> wrote:

> On 7/28/2012 1:31 AM, benli...@ihug.co.nz wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jul 28, 4:23 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >> Whom, exactly, were the orators addressing with "Your Majesty, Your
> >> Majesties, Your Royal Highnesses"?
>

> >> Are the plural Majesties sundry royalty of other nations, or are some
> >> people in England other than Her Majesty called Majesty? Just how many
> >> Royal Highnesses are there? (I believe Prince Philip is one.)
>
> > Yes, I think "Majesties" would have to be Royal Personages from other
> > countries; there is only one "Majesty" in the UK. "Highnesses" could
> > be in-house, but Philip was the only one actually shown.
>
> > Having spent a couple of hours watching this stuff, I found it
> > frustrating trying to find information on what I had been seeing.
> > (BBC's jumpy, scrappy editing didn't help at all.) Anybody know of a
> > useful, authoritative site?
>
> No, but I can tell you about the flying pig in the opening Thames montage.

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >> NBC chose not to broadcast -- or even mention -- the administration of
> >> the Olympic Oath. Did it take place?
>
> > Yes, three times as a matter of fact. The Athletes' (which mentioned
> > doping) was taken by a British tae-kwan-do-iste. Then there were
> > separate ones with different wording for judges/officials and for
> > trainers.
>

> >> (As usual, they pretended they were showing the event in real time,
> >> even though their coverage began at 7:30 EDT and ended at midnight.)
>
> > I think ours was genuinely live, from 7am to after noon, by which
> > point it was obviously way past Sir Paul's bedtime.
>
> > As usual the country names had some points of interest. Poor old
> > Macedonia had to parade under "F", because of you-know-who. But the
> > Taiwanese, who have to be referred to by the bizarre "Chinese
> > Taipei" (apparently the only thing the PRC and the rest could agree
> > on) were at least under "T". I forgot to notice how "Chinese Taipei"
> > translates in French.
>
> The explanations for Macedonia being filed under F, as well as for
> putting Democratic People's Republic of Korea and Democratic Republic of
> the Congo under D, make no more sense than putting United States of
> Mexico under U or People's Republic of China under P.
>
>

there are "long forms" which is the official name of the country, and
semi-official "short forms" (recognized by the UN). sometimes, for
political reasons, or at the insistence of the host country, there is
no "short form".

>
>
>
> > And we had the "Independent Olympic Athletes" (under "I" of course) --
> > who turn out to be people from countries which for various reasons
> > don't have a functioning national Olympic Committee. There were three,
> > I think -- from Netherlands Antilles and South Sudan -- and they
> > looked delighted to be there.

[Yusuf B Gursey]

On Jul 28, 8:51 am, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:

> On Saturday, July 28, 2012 1:31:15 AM UTC-4, benl...@ihug.co.nz wrote:
> > On Jul 28, 4:23 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> > > Whom, exactly, were the orators addressing with "Your Majesty, Your
> > > Majesties, Your Royal Highnesses"?
>
> > > Are the plural Majesties sundry royalty of other nations, or are some
> > > people in England other than Her Majesty called Majesty? Just how many
> > > Royal Highnesses are there? (I believe Prince Philip is one.)
>
> > Yes, I think "Majesties" would have to be Royal Personages from other
> > countries; there is only one "Majesty" in the UK. "Highnesses" could
> > be in-house, but Philip was the only one actually shown.
>

> Not Charles, William, and maybe Henry??

>
> > Having spent a couple of hours watching this stuff, I found it
> > frustrating trying to find information on what I had been seeing.
> > (BBC's jumpy, scrappy editing didn't help at all.) Anybody know of a
> > useful, authoritative site?
>

> nbcolympics.com will be streaming everything, they say.

>
> > > NBC chose not to broadcast -- or even mention -- the administration of
> > > the Olympic Oath. Did it take place?
>
> > Yes, three times as a matter of fact. The Athletes' (which mentioned
> > doping) was taken by a British tae-kwan-do-iste. Then there were
> > separate ones with different wording for judges/officials and for
> > trainers.
>

> :Trainers" would be new, vis-a-vis previous ones.

>
>
>
> > > (As usual, they pretended they were showing the event in real time,
> > > even though their coverage began at 7:30 EDT and ended at midnight.)
>
> > I think ours was genuinely live, from 7am to after noon, by which
> > point it was obviously way past Sir Paul's bedtime.
>

> Bob Costas and Matt Lauer agreed that he was "overcome with emotion" on seeing the crowds and so missed the first couple of lines.

>
> > As usual the country names had some points of interest. Poor old
> > Macedonia had to parade under "F", because of you-know-who. But the
> > Taiwanese, who have to be referred to by the bizarre "Chinese
> > Taipei" (apparently the only thing the PRC and the rest could agree
> > on) were at least under "T". I forgot to notice how "Chinese Taipei"
> > translates in French.
>

> They noted that Ghana is in the same alphabetical spot as Gold Coast would have been. Cote d'Ivoire was under C. They missed the /w/. Cape Verde rhymed with "bird" -- but they got Kiribati right.

the country insists on being called "Cote d'Ivoire in all languages.

>
> > And we had the "Independent Olympic Athletes" (under "I" of course) --
> > who turn out to be people from countries which for various reasons
> > don't have a functioning national Olympic Committee. There were three,
> > I think -- from Netherlands Antilles and South Sudan -- and they
> > looked delighted to be there.
>

> The three Former Netherlands Antilleans were there, but the one South Sudanian is still in Flagstaff, AZ with visa problems -- but he's a marathoner so doesn't have to actually get there until the last day. (Sounds like NBC knows more than NZ BBC!)
>
> Aruba had a contingent; why not "Bonaire and Curacao" if they don't whnt "Netherlands" in their name?
>
> British Virgin Islands under V, but (US) Virgin Islands under V. They didn't note that Samoa used to be all the way in the back under Western Samoa

[Peter T. Daniels]

NBC just did a little feature on the UK finally winning some gold --
the Tour de France guy, and women's pairs rowing (I don't think they
even mentioned the event they medaled in). They showed the flags
flying (so much nicer than the indoor display), and it was a skyful of
Union Jacks -- the other two were Australia and New Zealand (not that
Bob Costas mentioned that little fact).

Brits don't put their hand over their heart during the "hymne
nationale."

[António Marques]

I can't speak for Brits, but over here such displays of... what exactly?
are considered affected, unless the person has some justification for them.

--
Sent from one of my newsreaders

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Aug 1, 9:54 pm, António Marques <antonio...@sapo.pt> wrote:

It may have to do with the bizarre practice of flag worship which
seems to have set in in the US in the wake of the Civil War; note that
the Star-Spangled Banner is a hymn to the flag. Note also that it
wasn't made the official National Anthem until 1931 (by which time the
far more appropriate America the Beautiful was very well known).

[pauljk]

"Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:d227202c-6c13-41ba...@f2g2000vbm.googlegroups.com...

> On Aug 1, 9:54 pm, Ant�nio Marques <antonio...@sapo.pt> wrote:
>> "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>
>> > NBC just did a little feature on the UK finally winning some gold --
>> > the Tour de France guy, and women's pairs rowing (I don't think they
>> > even mentioned the event they medaled in). They showed the flags
>> > flying (so much nicer than the indoor display), and it was a skyful of
>> > Union Jacks -- the other two were Australia and New Zealand (not that
>> > Bob Costas mentioned that little fact).
>>
>> > Brits don't put their hand over their heart during the "hymne
>> > nationale."
>>
>> I can't speak for Brits, but over here such displays of... what exactly?

pretentious? poncy? ostentatious? gesture
(AFAIR, that is what it is often characterized as by the Europeans)

>> are considered affected, unless the person has some justification for them.
>
> It may have to do with the bizarre practice of flag worship which
> seems to have set in in the US in the wake of the Civil War;

Interesting.

The Brits often fall into the opposite extreme,
eg. the Union Jacks made into underpants.

pjk

[Dr Nick]

Did the questions get snipped out? The stray closing quote suggests
something got lost.

But on the last sentence, no we don't, and the other thing always looks
a bit odd to us (although we end up with our hands flapping vaguely by
our sides, which is far from ideal).

"Why's he doing that, his heart's in the middle, doesn't he know" was a
remark here from a 9 YO about the Hungarian swimmer who got gold.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Aug 2, 2:18 am, Dr Nick <nospa...@temporary-address.org.uk> wrote:

> "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> writes:
>
> > NBC just did a little feature on the UK finally winning some gold --
> > the Tour de France guy, and women's pairs rowing (I don't think they
> > even mentioned the event they medaled in). They showed the flags
> > flying (so much nicer than the indoor display), and it was a skyful of
> > Union Jacks -- the other two were Australia and New Zealand (not that
> > Bob Costas mentioned that little fact).
>
> > Brits don't put their hand over their heart during the "hymne
> > nationale."
>
> Did the questions get snipped out?  The stray closing quote suggests
> something got lost.

Should I have said "They showed part of the medal ceremony, and ..."?

> But on the last sentence, no we don't, and the other thing always looks
> a bit odd to us (although we end up with our hands flapping vaguely by
> our sides, which is far from ideal).
>
> "Why's he doing that, his heart's in the middle, doesn't he know" was a
> remark here from a 9 YO about the Hungarian swimmer who got gold.

Oh, do they actually award medals to people whose country name doesn't
begin with "U"?

Remember, broadcast NBC shows virtually nothing that doesn't feature
American winners or near-contenders. I expected last night to see at
least some hint of the badminton mess, but it might as well not have
happened.

Moreover, in both the men's team gymnastics and individual all-around,
it was as if the discipline of Stationary Rings has been eliminated --
but exactly twice (once each night), there was a flash in the
background of someone doing Rings. Were there more than four events
(vault, parallel bars, high bar, floor exercise) in the competition?

[Harlan Messinger]

On 8/1/2012 6:10 PM, Yusuf B Gursey wrote:
> On Jul 28, 8:40 am, Harlan Messinger <h.rem...@gavelcade.com> wrote:
>> The explanations for Macedonia being filed under F, as well as for
>> putting Democratic People's Republic of Korea and Democratic Republic of
>> the Congo under D, make no more sense than putting United States of
>> Mexico under U or People's Republic of China under P.
>
> there are "long forms" which is the official name of the country, and
> semi-official "short forms" (recognized by the UN). sometimes, for
> political reasons, or at the insistence of the host country, there is
> no "short form".

I can respond to that in either of two ways:

1. That's just a restatement of the absurd situation I was criticizing.

2. The sensible organization in an alphabetical index would be based on

China, People's Republic of
Congo, Democratic Republic of
Korea, People's Democratic Republic of
Macedonia, Former Yugoslav Republic of
Mexico
[or, optionally, "Mexico, United States of"]

The reason I say this is that alphabetization is typically used to help
people find items in the list. This goal is hindered by implementing a
rule that people are not likely to know, especially one like the "no
short form" rule that appears to be arbitrarily applied: how is the
average user of an index supposed to know which countries will appear
under the long form and which under the short? The arrangement above
reflects what people are likely to expect regarding where these
countries will be listed.

What's funny about Congo is, or at least this is my impression, that the
instant Zaire became Congo again, the unadorned word "Congo" that had
for 26 years been understood by default to refer to the Republic of the
Congo, suddenly was understood in common usage and news coverage to
refer to the Congo-Kinshasa, leaving Congo-Brazzaville in the role of
the ugly stepsister. Yet in official listings, as in the Parade of
Nations, Congo-Brazzaville is once again just plain Congo, and it's the
one-time Zaire that is relegated to the longer form.

[Jerry Friedman]

On Aug 2, 9:17 am, Harlan Messinger <h.removet...@gavelcade.com>
wrote:
...

> 2. The sensible organization in an alphabetical index would be based on
>
>         China, People's Republic of
>         Congo, Democratic Republic of
>         Korea, People's Democratic Republic of
>         Macedonia, Former Yugoslav Republic of
>         Mexico
>         [or, optionally, "Mexico, United States of"]

...

I agree with you about the sensible organization, but wouldn't "United
Mexican States" be a better translation of "Estados Unidos Mexicanos"?

http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/1.pdf

--
Jerry Friedman

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Aug 2, 12:25 pm, Jerry Friedman <jerry_fried...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Aug 2, 9:17 am, Harlan Messinger <h.removet...@gavelcade.com>
> wrote:
> ...
>
> > 2. The sensible organization in an alphabetical index would be based on
>
> >         China, People's Republic of
> >         Congo, Democratic Republic of
> >         Korea, People's Democratic Republic of
> >         Macedonia, Former Yugoslav Republic of
> >         Mexico
> >         [or, optionally, "Mexico, United States of"]

That would put the two Chinas and presumably the two Koreas and the
two Sudans next to each other.

> I agree with you about the sensible organization, but wouldn't "United
> Mexican States" be a better translation of "Estados Unidos Mexicanos"?
>
> http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/1.pdf

Also Brazil.

[Yusuf B Gursey]

On Aug 2, 11:17 am, Harlan Messinger <h.removet...@gavelcade.com>
wrote:

I agree, but in the real world political considerationsapply.

[Harlan Messinger]

It certainly would be. I had thought it was "Estados Unidos de M�xico".

[Harlan Messinger]

On 8/2/2012 12:53 PM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> On Aug 2, 12:25 pm, Jerry Friedman <jerry_fried...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Aug 2, 9:17 am, Harlan Messinger <h.removet...@gavelcade.com>
>> wrote:
>> ...
>>
>>> 2. The sensible organization in an alphabetical index would be based on
>>
>>> China, People's Republic of
>>> Congo, Democratic Republic of
>>> Korea, People's Democratic Republic of
>>> Macedonia, Former Yugoslav Republic of
>>> Mexico
>>> [or, optionally, "Mexico, United States of"]
>
> That would put the two Chinas and presumably the two Koreas and the
> two Sudans next to each other.

Correct. Bwahahahaha!

To cause real trouble, one could propose

America, United States of

I guess I'm starting to see why politics sometimes overrule common sense
when one is being pragmatic about this subject.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

On 2012-08-02 19:11:54 +0200, Harlan Messinger

> It certainly would be. I had thought it was "Estados Unidos de México".

Sometimes it is (and I suspect the formal name has changed from time to
time), and people who appear to be Mexicans don't necessarily agree.
Today the Wikipedia page says "México[5] (náhuatl: Mēxihco «en el
ombligo de la luna»), oficialmente llamado Estados Unidos Mexicanos, es
un país situado en la parte meridional de América del Norte", but when
Google indexed it it said "México (náhuatl: Mēxihco «en el ombligo de
la luna»), oficialmente llamado Estados Unidos Mexicanos, es un país
situado en la parte meridional de América ...", so someoneone has done
some editing.

I restored the [5], which I inititially edited out, because it says
"De acuerdo con el Diccionario panhispánico de dudas, también es
aceptable la forma Méjico y el gentilicio mejicano; estas formas
minoritarias son empleadas en España y algunas zonas de América
Latina." I find that much more likely to have been written by a
Spaniard than by a Mexican, so my "people who appear to be Mexicans"
perhaps were not.
--
athel

[David Dyer-Bennet]

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

> On Aug 2, 12:25 pm, Jerry Friedman <jerry_fried...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Aug 2, 9:17 am, Harlan Messinger <h.removet...@gavelcade.com>
>> wrote:
>> ...
>>
>> > 2. The sensible organization in an alphabetical index would be based on
>>
>> >         China, People's Republic of
>> >         Congo, Democratic Republic of
>> >         Korea, People's Democratic Republic of
>> >         Macedonia, Former Yugoslav Republic of
>> >         Mexico
>> >         [or, optionally, "Mexico, United States of"]
>
> That would put the two Chinas and presumably the two Koreas and the
> two Sudans next to each other.

Yes, that's the point -- that's most convenient and easiest to navigate
for those looking for a country. We all think "Sudan" first, not the
full formal name.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, dd...@dd-b.net; http://dd-b.net/
Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/
Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/
Dragaera: http://dragaera.info

[Guy Barry]

"David Dyer-Bennet" <dd...@dd-b.net> wrote in message
news:ylfkhasl...@dd-b.net...

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

> > That would put the two Chinas and presumably the two Koreas and the
> > two Sudans next to each other.
>
> Yes, that's the point -- that's most convenient and easiest to navigate
> for those looking for a country. We all think "Sudan" first, not the
> full formal name.

Presumably anyone looking for "South Sudan" would look there and not under
"Sudan, South"?

--
Guy Barry

[Dr Nick]

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

> On Aug 2, 2:18 am, Dr Nick <nospa...@temporary-address.org.uk> wrote:
>> "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> writes:
>>
>> > NBC just did a little feature on the UK finally winning some gold
>> > -- the Tour de France guy, and women's pairs rowing (I don't think
>> > they even mentioned the event they medaled in). They showed the
>> > flags flying (so much nicer than the indoor display), and it was a
>> > skyful of Union Jacks -- the other two were Australia and New
>> > Zealand (not that Bob Costas mentioned that little fact).
>>
>> > Brits don't put their hand over their heart during the "hymne
>> > nationale."
>> Did the questions get snipped out?  The stray closing quote suggests
>> something got lost.
>
> Should I have said "They showed part of the medal ceremony, and ..."?

Sorry - I misread - the quote is there of course. I still don't see a
question!

>> But on the last sentence, no we don't, and the other thing always
>> looks a bit odd to us (although we end up with our hands flapping
>> vaguely by our sides, which is far from ideal).
>> "Why's he doing that, his heart's in the middle, doesn't he know"
>> was a remark here from a 9 YO about the Hungarian swimmer who got
>> gold.
>
> Oh, do they actually award medals to people whose country name doesn't
> begin with "U"?

Well Great Britain got a couple more today.

> Remember, broadcast NBC shows virtually nothing that doesn't feature
> American winners or near-contenders. I expected last night to see at
> least some hint of the badminton mess, but it might as well not have
> happened.

We're not that bad, but we certainly concentrate on our success or - at
least - possible success. But that's only human to some extent.

> Moreover, in both the men's team gymnastics and individual all-around,
> it was as if the discipline of Stationary Rings has been eliminated --
> but exactly twice (once each night), there was a flash in the
> background of someone doing Rings. Were there more than four events
> (vault, parallel bars, high bar, floor exercise) in the competition?

I'm afraid I've no idea. I've got almost no interest in sport and have
just been watching odd snippets (I've got about the bare minimum UK TV
channels here, so only have three full-time Olympic channels).

[musika]

Yes. Also the still rings and the pommel horse.
--
Ray
UK

[Harlan Messinger]

And

Africa, South

So it really isn't cut and dried.

[erilar]

In article
<6452f48d-1098-495e...@a19g2000vba.googlegroups.com>,

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

> in both the men's team gymnastics and individual all-around,
> it was as if the discipline of Stationary Rings has been eliminated --
> but exactly twice (once each night), there was a flash in the
> background of someone doing Rings. Were there more than four events
> (vault, parallel bars, high bar, floor exercise) in the competition?

I've noticed that, too. There are five, however: pommel horse,too. No
rings, apparently.

--
Erilar, biblioholic medievalist

[Yusuf B Gursey]

On Aug 2, 1:35 pm, David Dyer-Bennet <d...@dd-b.net> wrote:

> "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> writes:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Aug 2, 12:25 pm, Jerry Friedman <jerry_fried...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> On Aug 2, 9:17 am, Harlan Messinger <h.removet...@gavelcade.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> ...
>
> >> > 2. The sensible organization in an alphabetical index would be based on
>
> >> >         China, People's Republic of
> >> >         Congo, Democratic Republic of
> >> >         Korea, People's Democratic Republic of
> >> >         Macedonia, Former Yugoslav Republic of
> >> >         Mexico
> >> >         [or, optionally, "Mexico, United States of"]
>
> > That would put the two Chinas and presumably the two Koreas and the
> > two Sudans next to each other.
>
> Yes, that's the point -- that's most convenient and easiest to navigate
> for those looking for a country.   We all think "Sudan" first, not the
> full formal name.

Africa, South ?!

> --
> David Dyer-Bennet, d...@dd-b.net;http://dd-b.net/

[Frank S]

"Athel Cornish-Bowden" <athe...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:a7vrd9...@mid.individual.net...

Slightly OT: I didn't know, and was delighted to learn, that the náhuatl
/Mēxihco/ means «en el
ombligo de la luna» ...

Really? "In the belly-button of the Moon"?

--
Frank ess

[Yusuf B Gursey]

On Aug 2, 3:04 pm, "Frank S" <fshef...@san.rr.com> wrote:
> "Athel Cornish-Bowden" <athel...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message

>
> news:a7vrd9...@mid.individual.net...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 2012-08-02 19:11:54 +0200, Harlan Messinger

here is from Englsih Wikipedia:

<<

Mēxihco was the Nahuatl term for the heartland of the Aztec Empire,
namely, the Valley of Mexico, and its people, the Mexica, and
surrounding territories which became the future State of Mexico as a
division of New Spain prior to independence (compare Latium). It is
generally considered to be a toponym for the valley which became the
primary ethnonym for the Aztec Triple Alliance as a result, or vice
versa.

The suffix -co is the Nahuatl locative, making the word a place name.
Beyond that, the etymology is uncertain. It has been suggested that it
is derived from Mextli or Mēxihtli, a secret name for the god of war
and patron of the Aztecs, Huitzilopochtli, in which case Mēxihco means
"Place where Huitzilopochtli lives".[31] Another hypothesis[32]
suggests that Mēxihco derives from a portmanteau of the Nahuatl words
for "moon" (mētztli) and navel (xīctli). This meaning ("Place at the
Center of the Moon") might then refer to Tenochtitlan's position in
the middle of Lake Texcoco. The system of interconnected lakes, of
which Texcoco formed the center, had the form of a rabbit, which the
Mesoamericans pareidolically associated with the moon. Still another
hypothesis suggests that it is derived from Mēctli, the goddess of
maguey.[32]

>>



> --
> Frank ess

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Aug 2, 2:50 pm, erilar <dra...@chibardun.net.invalid> wrote:
> In article
> <6452f48d-1098-495e-8e7c-8940bbefb...@a19g2000vba.googlegroups.com>,

>  "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> >  in both the men's team gymnastics and individual all-around,
> > it was as if the discipline of Stationary Rings has been eliminated --
> > but exactly twice (once each night), there was a flash in the
> > background of someone doing Rings. Were there more than four events
> > (vault, parallel bars, high bar, floor exercise) in the competition?
>
> I've noticed that, too.  There are five, however: pommel horse,too.  No
> rings, apparently.

Pommel horse was the Nemesis of both Americans. Perhaps I blocked it.

I don't have an HDTV, so I couldn't read the point totals and discover
whether they corresponded to a 5 x 16(ish) maximum score, or a 6 x 16.

But there _were_ guys on rings in the background during the other 5
events. And it's really the most impressive event of all -- most of Mr
Newton's laws are not helping them at all, they're entirely on their
own.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Aug 2, 2:35 pm, Harlan Messinger <h.removet...@gavelcade.com>
wrote:

> So it really isn't cut and dried.-

And Britain, Great, and Ireland, Northern, United Kingdom of

I think they mentioned during the opening that Scotland and Wales (at
least) have previously had separate contingents.

"America" wouldn't cause a conflict, but there's

African Republic [quondam Empire], Central

How about splitting up all the Caribbean St.s?

[Evan Kirshenbaum]

Dr Nick <nosp...@temporary-address.org.uk> writes:

> "Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> writes:
>
>> Oh, do they actually award medals to people whose country name doesn't
>> begin with "U"?
>
> Well Great Britain got a couple more today.

So do athletes from Northern Ireland compete for the Irish team or are
they considered "independent" like the ones from the Netherlands
Antilles and the guy from South Sudan?

--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
Still with HP Labs |All tax revenue is the result of
SF Bay Area (1982-) |holding a gun to somebody's head.
Chicago (1964-1982) |Not paying taxes is against the law.
|If you don't pay your taxes, you'll
evan.kir...@gmail.com |be fined. If you don't pay the fine,
|you'll be jailed. If you try to
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ |escape from jail, you'll be shot.
| P.J. O'Rourke

[Evan Kirshenbaum]

Harlan Messinger <h.remo...@gavelcade.com> writes:

> On 8/2/2012 12:53 PM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>> On Aug 2, 12:25 pm, Jerry Friedman <jerry_fried...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> On Aug 2, 9:17 am, Harlan Messinger <h.removet...@gavelcade.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> ...
>>>
>>>> 2. The sensible organization in an alphabetical index would be based on
>>>
>>>> China, People's Republic of
>>>> Congo, Democratic Republic of
>>>> Korea, People's Democratic Republic of
>>>> Macedonia, Former Yugoslav Republic of
>>>> Mexico
>>>> [or, optionally, "Mexico, United States of"]
>>
>> That would put the two Chinas and presumably the two Koreas and the
>> two Sudans next to each other.
>
> Correct. Bwahahahaha!
>
> To cause real trouble, one could propose
>
> America, United States of

No, to cause real trouble, propose

Macedonia, Former Yugoslav Republic of

> I guess I'm starting to see why politics sometimes overrule common
> sense when one is being pragmatic about this subject.

--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
Still with HP Labs |...as a mobile phone is analogous
SF Bay Area (1982-) |to a Q-Tip -- yeah, it's something
Chicago (1964-1982) |you stick in your ear, but there
|all resemblance ends.
evan.kir...@gmail.com | Ross Howard

http://www.kirshenbaum.net/

[musika]

Evan Kirshenbaum wrote:
> Dr Nick <nosp...@temporary-address.org.uk> writes:
>
>> "Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> writes:
>>
>>> Oh, do they actually award medals to people whose country name
>>> doesn't begin with "U"?
>>
>> Well Great Britain got a couple more today.
>
> So do athletes from Northern Ireland compete for the Irish team or are
> they considered "independent" like the ones from the Netherlands
> Antilles and the guy from South Sudan?

No they are part of Team GB. (Great Britain and Northern Ireland)
--
Ray
UK

[Evan Kirshenbaum]

Ah. Someone should tell the official website, which thinks the
country is "Great Britain".

http://www.london2012.com/country/great-britain/

--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
Still with HP Labs |If to "man" a phone implies handing
SF Bay Area (1982-) |it over to a person of the male
Chicago (1964-1982) |gender, then to "monitor" it
|suggests handing it over to a
evan.kir...@gmail.com |lizard.
| Rohan Oberoi
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Aug 2, 7:22 pm, Evan Kirshenbaum <evan.kirshenb...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Harlan Messinger <h.removet...@gavelcade.com> writes:
> > On 8/2/2012 12:53 PM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >> On Aug 2, 12:25 pm, Jerry Friedman <jerry_fried...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>> On Aug 2, 9:17 am, Harlan Messinger <h.removet...@gavelcade.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>> ...
>
> >>>> 2. The sensible organization in an alphabetical index would be based on
>
> >>>>          China, People's Republic of
> >>>>          Congo, Democratic Republic of
> >>>>          Korea, People's Democratic Republic of
> >>>>          Macedonia, Former Yugoslav Republic of
> >>>>          Mexico
> >>>>          [or, optionally, "Mexico, United States of"]
>
> >> That would put the two Chinas and presumably the two Koreas and the
> >> two Sudans next to each other.
>
> > Correct. Bwahahahaha!
>
> > To cause real trouble, one could propose
>
> >    America, United States of
>
> No, to cause real trouble, propose
>
>         Macedonia, Former Yugoslav Republic of

He did.

[Robert Bannister]

On 3/08/12 7:22 AM, Evan Kirshenbaum wrote:
> Harlan Messinger <h.remo...@gavelcade.com> writes:
>
>> On 8/2/2012 12:53 PM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>> On Aug 2, 12:25 pm, Jerry Friedman <jerry_fried...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> On Aug 2, 9:17 am, Harlan Messinger <h.removet...@gavelcade.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>>> 2. The sensible organization in an alphabetical index would be based on
>>>>
>>>>> China, People's Republic of
>>>>> Congo, Democratic Republic of
>>>>> Korea, People's Democratic Republic of

>>>>> Macedonia, Former Yugoslav Republic of
>>>>> Mexico

>>>>> [or, optionally, "Mexico, United States of"]
>>>
>>> That would put the two Chinas and presumably the two Koreas and the
>>> two Sudans next to each other.
>>
>> Correct. Bwahahahaha!
>>
>> To cause real trouble, one could propose
>>
>> America, United States of
>
> No, to cause real trouble, propose
>
> Macedonia, Former Yugoslav Republic of

You didn't like the earlier listing higher up:
"Macedonia, former Yugoslav Republic of
Mexico"?


--
Robert Bannister

[Robert Bannister]

On 3/08/12 2:30 AM, Yusuf B Gursey wrote:
> On Aug 2, 1:35 pm, David Dyer-Bennet <d...@dd-b.net> wrote:
>> "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> writes:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Aug 2, 12:25 pm, Jerry Friedman <jerry_fried...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> On Aug 2, 9:17 am, Harlan Messinger <h.removet...@gavelcade.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> ...
>>
>>>>> 2. The sensible organization in an alphabetical index would be based on
>>
>>>>> China, People's Republic of
>>>>> Congo, Democratic Republic of
>>>>> Korea, People's Democratic Republic of
>>>>> Macedonia, Former Yugoslav Republic of
>>>>> Mexico
>>>>> [or, optionally, "Mexico, United States of"]
>>
>>> That would put the two Chinas and presumably the two Koreas and the
>>> two Sudans next to each other.
>>
>> Yes, that's the point -- that's most convenient and easiest to navigate
>> for those looking for a country. We all think "Sudan" first, not the
>> full formal name.
>
> Africa, South ?!

That is still easier to find than by looking under R, where the RSA
often is. All the same, the "South" seems to be a much more integral
part of the name than "Republic", "Democracy", "Peoples' Thingy" or
"United Whatsit"


--
Robert Bannister

[pauljk]

"Harlan Messinger" <h.remo...@gavelcade.com> wrote in message
news:a7vjrg...@mid.individual.net...

> On 8/1/2012 6:10 PM, Yusuf B Gursey wrote:
>> On Jul 28, 8:40 am, Harlan Messinger <h.rem...@gavelcade.com> wrote:
>>> The explanations for Macedonia being filed under F, as well as for
>>> putting Democratic People's Republic of Korea and Democratic Republic of
>>> the Congo under D, make no more sense than putting United States of
>>> Mexico under U or People's Republic of China under P.
>>
>> there are "long forms" which is the official name of the country, and
>> semi-official "short forms" (recognized by the UN). sometimes, for
>> political reasons, or at the insistence of the host country, there is
>> no "short form".
>
> I can respond to that in either of two ways:
>
> 1. That's just a restatement of the absurd situation I was criticizing.
>
> 2. The sensible organization in an alphabetical index would be based on
>
> China, People's Republic of
> Congo, Democratic Republic of
> Korea, People's Democratic Republic of
> Macedonia, Former Yugoslav Republic of
> Mexico
> [or, optionally, "Mexico, United States of"]

Would the USA be listed under "America, United States of"? :-)
or "USA, United States of America"?

pjk