boat gender
Neil Corbett
name e.g. George? I need to know!
Neil Arlidge
> Boats are usually referred to as she, but what do you do if it has a
> male name e.g. George? I need to know!
My first boat had a male name (Beatty) and was referered to as an "it". N
Bear Nest is also refered to as an "it"..........and as many listers will
know, sometimes a lot worse! :-)
--
Neil Arlidge - NB *******
Follow the travels of the TNC at : http://www.tuesdaynightclub.co.uk
John Gwalter
"Neil Arlidge" <ne...@tuesdaynightclub.co.uk> wrote in message
news:TeednZoKcpU...@giganews.com...
circumstances require.
--
JOhn
NB Ernest (that one, not the other one)
My indecision is final.
Andy Champ
> Boats are usually referred to as she, but what do you do if it has a male
> name e.g. George? I need to know!
>
>
Ships are always She. An example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_King_George_V_(1939)
A battleship named after a King is surely about as male as they could
get! I have no idea why this should be the case however...
http://www.usni.org/navalhistory/Articles98/NHfoley.htm
I imagine the same applies to boats.
Oh yes - "A ship may carry a boat, but a boat never carries a ship" -
and that's probably a misquote, 'cos I can't trace it.
Andy
KGB
>A battleship named after a King is surely about as male as they could
>get! I have no idea why this should be the case however...
Hi
On the other hand, some queens are male.
Regards
KGB
Alastair
It probably depends on your ancestry. The Vikings certainly considered
their boats to be male.
--
Alastair
Mike Ricletts
"Alastair" <alas...@as3jg.freeuk.com> wrote in message
news:43cab03e...@news.metronet.co.uk...
bateau.
Mike Ricketts
Mike Ricletts
"Tim Leech" <dutto...@onetel.no.spam.com> wrote in message
news:jktms1p33l6kal3uf...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 16 Jan 2006 11:00:32 +0100, "Mike Ricletts"
> <Michael....@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
>
> >
> >The French language also treats them as male ie le bateau rather than la
> >bateau.
> >
>
Good point Tim. As a point of etiquette would you open a lock gate for la
peniche and leave le bateau to do his own ?
Mike Ricketts
david
David
"Neil Corbett" <neil.c...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:COuyf.53974$Dg6....@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net...
Adrian Stott
<neil.c...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
Boats have *never* had gender. This in attribute of (e.g.) French
nouns.
However, boats have frequently been treated as if they are of the
female sex, irrespective of the apparent maleness of their names.
Gender adjectives are (e.g.) "masculine" "feminine", while sex
adjectives are (e.g.) "male" "female". I find the current use of the
word "gender" when "sex" is meant do be very tedious, and very
Victorian-piano-limbs. I hope that the current fashion for political
correctness will have run its course soon.
(exits muttering)
Adrian
Adrian Stott
adr...@spam.co.uk
07956-299966
Neil Corbett
Neil
"Adrian Stott" <adr...@spam.com> wrote in message
news:hr0ls1d3euj21s81r...@4ax.com...
Greg Chapman
>I stand corrected!
I stand informed! I never thought about those subtleties before!
(However, my wife always gets me wild when she says "disinterested" when she
means "uninterested". After almost thirty years, I think I may have cured
her!)
Greg
JoSoap
"Andy Champ" <no....@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:WISdnbq3EMnnOlfe...@pipex.net...
Ship has a captain, a boat a skipper.
Jo
Brian Dominic
<dutto...@onetel.no.spam.com> picked up their glass of wine, sat
back and said:
>>The French language also treats them as male ie le bateau rather than la
>>bateau.
>>
>
>But it's la peniche. Barges are female <g>
>
That'll please Adrian!
Brian L Dominic
Web Sites:
Canals: http://www.brianscanalpages.co.uk
Friends of the Cromford Canal: http://www.cromfordcanal.org.uk
(Waterways World Site of the Month, November 2005)
Mid-Derbyshire Light Railway: http://www.mdlr.co.uk
Newsgroup readers should note that the reply-to address is NOT read:
To email me, please send to brian(dot)dominic(at)tiscali(dot)co(dot)uk
Nick Atty
wrote:
Ha - we agree on this aspect of language - however we feel about nouns
of multitude.
I'm currently having fun with the claim that "chairman" in a
constitution I am partly responsible for is "gender specific language"
and should be replaced by "chair".
I point out in reply that English doesn't have genders, and that it is
eurocentricism - and western eurocentricism at that - to assume that the
only genders are male and female.
Quite clearly "chair" is the wrong gender for someone who chairs a
meeting, as chair is of the inanimate gender in many languages.
--
On-line canal route planner: http://www.canalplan.org.uk
(Waterways World site of the month, April 2001)
Brian Dominic
<nos...@nandj.freeserve.co.uk> picked up their glass of wine, sat back
and said:
>I'm currently having fun with the claim that "chairman" in a
>constitution I am partly responsible for is "gender specific language"
>and should be replaced by "chair".
No - the chair is what you sit on, or is the term for the office of
being chairman - i.e. "Can I (through the Chair) ask if.............."
Ron Jones
>
> I'm currently having fun with the claim that "chairman" in a
> constitution I am partly responsible for is "gender specific language"
> and should be replaced by "chair".
I think the term you require is "chairperson"
--
Ron Jones
Process Safety & Development, Alfa Aesar Avocado Lancaster UK
Don't repeat history, see unreported near misses in chemical lab/plant
at http://www.crhf.org.uk
Only two things are certain: The universe and human stupidity; and I'm
not certain about the universe. ~ Albert Einstein
Molly Mockford
<nos...@nandj.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in
<868ts1pil9d67rlfa...@4ax.com>:
>I'm currently having fun with the claim that "chairman" in a
>constitution I am partly responsible for is "gender specific language"
>and should be replaced by "chair".
It's interesting to note that men who splutter "I don't want to be
called a Chair - I'm not a bit of wood!" are generally quite happy to
form part of a Board.
--
Molly Mockford
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety - Benjamin Franklin
(My Reply-To address *is* valid, though may not remain so for ever.)
Adrian Stott
<nbru...@lineone.net> wrote:
>On Mon, 16 Jan 2006 10:34:42 +0000, Tim Leech
><dutto...@onetel.no.spam.com> picked up their glass of wine, sat
>back and said:
>
>
>>>The French language also treats them as male ie le bateau rather than la
>>>bateau.
>>>
>>
>>But it's la peniche. Barges are female <g>
>>
>That'll please Adrian!
Huh?
On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 18:11:05 -0000, "JoSoap" <JoS...@mf.eclipse.co.uk>
wrote:
>Ship has a captain, a boat a skipper.
>Jo
Er, no IMHO. "Skipper" is derived from a Dutch word, meaning a
person in charges of a "schip", meaning "ship".
Dutch barges certainly have skippers, and are usually thought of as
schips, although may be called "boats". So, I suggest, do submarines,
which are always boats.
Adrian Stott
>On Mon, 16 Jan 2006 17:07:32 +0000, Adrian Stott <adr...@spam.com>
>wrote:
>>Boats have *never* had gender. This in attribute of (e.g.) French
>>nouns.
>>Gender adjectives are (e.g.) "masculine" "feminine", while sex
>>adjectives are (e.g.) "male" "female". I find the current use of the
>>word "gender" when "sex" is meant do be very tedious, and very
>>Victorian-piano-limbs. I hope that the current fashion for political
>>correctness will have run its course soon.
>>
>>(exits muttering)
>
>Ha - we agree on this aspect of language - however we feel about nouns
>of multitude.
One step at a time <g>.
>I'm currently having fun with the claim that "chairman" in a
>constitution I am partly responsible for is "gender specific language"
>and should be replaced by "chair".
>
>I point out in reply that English doesn't have genders, and that it is
>eurocentricism - and western eurocentricism at that - to assume that the
>only genders are male and female.
See above. Genders are (e.g.) masculine and feminine. Sex is (e.g.)
male or female.
>Quite clearly "chair" is the wrong gender for someone who chairs a
>meeting, as chair is of the inanimate gender in many languages.
"Chair" has no gender in English. English nouns don't have gender.
A chair can't have a gender, as it is not a noun.
"Man" is a word with at least a couple of meanings. One is "the human
race". Another is "a male of the human race". The real problem seems
to be that some people can't realise/accept that in words like
"chairman", the "man" part should be interpreted as having the first
of these definitions.
"Chairman" is entirely correct to describe the person who is in charge
of a meeting, and in particular is both not sex-specific and
non-sexist.
Now, we could on to dealing with those people who insist on using
"they" as a singular pronoun, in a desparate attempt to avoid using
"he" brought on by refusing to admit that "he" is both the male and
the neutral pronoun. But this is a boating newsgroup, so maybe we
shouldn't.
On Wed, 18 Jan 2006 22:45:38 -0000, "Ron Jones" <r...@ronjones.org.uk>
wrote:
>I think the term you require is "chairperson"
What's that, Ron? Someone who has a fetish for furniture?
Alastair
<nos...@nandj.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
>Ha - we agree on this aspect of language - however we feel about nouns
>of multitude.
>
>I'm currently having fun with the claim that "chairman" in a
>constitution I am partly responsible for is "gender specific language"
>and should be replaced by "chair".
>
>I point out in reply that English doesn't have genders, and that it is
>eurocentricism - and western eurocentricism at that - to assume that the
>only genders are male and female.
>
>Quite clearly "chair" is the wrong gender for someone who chairs a
>meeting, as chair is of the inanimate gender in many languages.
I thought the 'man' part of chairman was derived from 'manage' as is
the case for 'seaman'.
--
Alastair
Paul Burke
>
> I thought the 'man' part of chairman was derived from 'manage' as is
> the case for 'seaman'.
No, it was derived from a time when women didn't have civic rights. The
term wasn't meant to be deliberately nasty, just no one thought it could
be any other way. But I don't think it's worth changing the word now
they have civic rights. If you really want a gender-neutral version,
start by improving on "meeting coordinator" or something.
Paul Burke
Brian J Goggin
wrote:
>Now, we could on to dealing with those people who insist on using
>"they" as a singular pronoun, in a desparate attempt to avoid using
>"he" brought on by refusing to admit that "he" is both the male and
>the neutral pronoun. But this is a boating newsgroup, so maybe we
>shouldn't.
We could, on the other hand, talk about people who benefit from the
development of the English language over hundreds of years, but who
believe that development ceased the moment they themselves learned to
read.
bjg
Dave Larrington
> Nick Atty wrote:
> > On Mon, 16 Jan 2006 17:07:32 +0000, Adrian Stott <adr...@spam.com>
> > wrote:
> ><snip>
> >
> > I'm currently having fun with the claim that "chairman" in a
> > constitution I am partly responsible for is "gender specific language"
> > and should be replaced by "chair".
>
> I think the term you require is "chairperson"
Is not "son" gender-specific also? I suggest "chairperoffspring"...
(dies)
--
Dave Larrington - <http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/>
Nicht in die laufende Trommel greifen.
Mike Stevens
Way back in the 1970s it became illegal to have single-sex Trade Unions, as
a result of which the one I belonged to which was for men-only merged with
another that was similar in policy but was women-only. The debate on
nomenclature was protracted and heated as many of the women feared that ther
representation at senior level would get swamped (which didn't happen).
Before the merger, each Union had a National Chairman. On merger, it was
decided that the title would be National President. The same pattern was
adopted for Branch Presidents, but AFIK we continued to use "Chairman" for
other committees, althogh some members preferred to say "Chair".
--
Mike Stevens
narrowboat Felis Catus III
web site www.mike-stevens.co.uk
No man is an island. So is Man.
Mike Stevens
>
> I think the term you require is "chairperson"
Especially in Personchester or Peoplefield.
Neil Corbett
charge of meetings usually like be called chairman or madame chairman when
being directly addressed.
Anyway, back to where I unleashed this amazing thread. I have decided to
call the boat I am buying, (which is called Herbie) "she".
Thanks everyone.
Neil Corbett
"Mike Stevens" <michael...@which.net> wrote in message
news:439eqbF...@individual.net...
Dave Mayall
> In my long experience working with Local Authority committees, females in
> charge of meetings usually like be called chairman or madame chairman when
> being directly addressed.
Which is, of course entirely correct.
"Chair" or "Chairwoman" are abominations.
Mike Ricletts
"Neil Corbett" <neil.c...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:hdMzf.1857$N66....@newsfe2-win.ntli.net...
>
> call the boat I am buying, (which is called Herbie) "she".
>
Herbie was a male but I am not sure of germanic gender terms
Retires waiting for onslaught from Adrian...............:-)
Mike Ricketts
Mike Ricletts
> Ron Jones wrote:
> >
> > I think the term you require is "chairperson"
>
> Especially in Personchester or Peoplefield.
>
Seriously though if you want to find PC examples where the plot has
obviously been lost, then look no further than dates. An article in the
Times criticised Mr Paxman for using the term BCE on a recent University
Challenge. BCE or Before the Common Era is replacing BC as a more
"religiously neutral" means of identifying dates. AD is being replaced by
CE.
I await the arrival of gangs of wandering stonemasons correcting all of our
victorian public buildings.
Mike Ricketts
Adrian Stott
If it is not broken, don't fix it <g>
On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 10:11:01 GMT, alas...@as3jg.freeuk.com (Alastair)
wrote:
>I thought the 'man' part of chairman was derived from 'manage' as is
>the case for 'seaman'.
You think you can manage the sea?
On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 10:39:39 +0000, Paul Burke <pa...@scazon.com>
wrote:
>No, it was derived from a time when women didn't have civic rights. The
>term wasn't meant to be deliberately nasty, just no one thought it could
>be any other way. But I don't think it's worth changing the word now
>they have civic rights. If you really want a gender-neutral version,
>start by improving on "meeting coordinator" or something.
>
>Paul Burke
I keep having to remind myself that this political correctness stuff
is *not* from a sitcom script.
Have a nice day!
John Gwalter
"Brian Dominic" <nbru...@lineone.net> wrote in message
news:3lats1ttob76tscm0...@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 18 Jan 2006 20:21:19 +0000, Nick Atty
> <nos...@nandj.freeserve.co.uk> picked up their glass of wine, sat back
> and said:
>
>>I'm currently having fun with the claim that "chairman" in a
>>constitution I am partly responsible for is "gender specific language"
>>and should be replaced by "chair".
>
> No - the chair is what you sit on, or is the term for the office of
> being chairman - i.e. "Can I (through the Chair) ask if.............."
>
> Brian L Dominic
>
woman in the top committee job is "Madam Chairman."
--
JOhn
NB Ernest (that one, not the other one)
My indecision is final.
Nick Atty
<michael...@which.net> wrote:
>Way back in the 1970s it became illegal to have single-sex Trade Unions, as
>a result of which the one I belonged to which was for men-only merged with
>another that was similar in policy but was women-only. The debate on
>nomenclature was protracted and heated as many of the women feared that ther
>representation at senior level would get swamped (which didn't happen).
>Before the merger, each Union had a National Chairman. On merger, it was
>decided that the title would be National President. The same pattern was
>adopted for Branch Presidents, but AFIK we continued to use "Chairman" for
>other committees, althogh some members preferred to say "Chair".
Yeeeess. I did carefully avoid saying what sort of organisation I was
having this discussion within!
Tony Clayton
> On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 10:08:42 +0000, Adrian Stott <adr...@spam.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> >
> >On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 18:11:05 -0000, "JoSoap" <JoS...@mf.eclipse.co.uk>
> >wrote:
> >
> >>Ship has a captain, a boat a skipper.
> >>Jo
> >
> >Er, no IMHO. "Skipper" is derived from a Dutch word, meaning a
> >person in charges of a "schip", meaning "ship".
> >
> >Dutch barges certainly have skippers, and are usually thought of as
> >schips, although may be called "boats". So, I suggest, do submarines,
> >which are always boats.
> >
>
> I think submarines, which are indeed known as boats, have Commanders.
>
> I'll accept correction if I'm wrong,though.
I suspect you are wrong. It is just that in many cases in the past
submarines were quite small craft so were commanded by someone who was
a Lieutenant-Commander; the Captain would be on the Mother Ship
and command the Flotilla.
Is not the Submarine Captain being court-martialled for his
bullying manner a Captain, now that our submarines are rather larger.
--
Tony Clayton tony.cla...@pem.cam.ac.uk
Coins of the UK : http://www.coinsoftheuk.info
Sent using RISCOS on an Acorn Strong Arm RiscPC
... I like Boolean logic. NOT!
Brian J Goggin
wrote:
>If it is not broken, don't fix it <g>
That's not the way the English language works. There is no Central
Committee*. If some users dislike an existing usage, and want to
choose another, they are perfectly entitled to do so. Some folk will
adopt it; others won't. Those who like it are entitled to use it and,
unless it is somehow unclear or confusing (which "Chair" isn't, given
that English works on context), what valid ground for objecting is
there? Your taste gets just as many votes as any other user's, and to
talk about what something "really means" or what it "originally meant"
is to miss the point. Vox populi, vox Dei.
bjg (language libertarian)
* Well, there is, but if I told you about it I'd have to kill you.
KGB
<Michael....@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
>Watch out for those Personcovers in the road !!
Personholecovers to be pedantic!!!!
KGB
Don Aitken
<myinitialsATmyorganization.ie> wrote:
We could even talk about the fact that singular "they", far from being
a new-fangled PC invention, has been part of the language since the
14th century. The 19th century prescriptive grammarians briefly
managed to drive it out of formal edited prose, thereby enabling those
who ignorantly think that is what defines a language to deny its
existence.
--
Don Aitken
Mail to the From: address is not read.
To email me, substitute "clara.co.uk" for "freeuk.com"
Adrian Stott
<myinitialsATmyorganization.ie> wrote:
>On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 17:48:58 +0000, Adrian Stott <adr...@spam.com>
>wrote:
>
>>If it is not broken, don't fix it <g>
>
>That's not the way the English language works. There is no Central
>Committee*. If some users dislike an existing usage, and want to
>choose another, they are perfectly entitled to do so. Some folk will
>adopt it; others won't. Those who like it are entitled to use it and,
>unless it is somehow unclear or confusing (which "Chair" isn't, given
>that English works on context), what valid ground for objecting is
>there? Your taste gets just as many votes as any other user's, and to
>talk about what something "really means" or what it "originally meant"
>is to miss the point. Vox populi, vox Dei.
Ah, I can see I have misspoken myself.
I was not aping the dictum of a Central Committee. I was suggesting
to the English speaking population that it not "choose another" usage
when the existing one is just fine. Especially when the replacement
is awful.
The problem with PC is that the PCites seem to have intimidated many
of the rest of the population into worrying that they (the rest) will
be seen as bad people if they don't adopt such usages as
"differently-abled". I feel intimidation is a poor justification for
language evolution.
>bjg (language libertarian)
I'm definitely in favour of libertarianism.
On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 18:13:09 +0100, "Mike Ricletts"
<Michael....@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
>"Neil Corbett" <neil.c...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
>news:hdMzf.1857$N66....@newsfe2-win.ntli.net...
>>
>Neil, are you sure you do not want a Volkswagon or Disney NG ? In the films
>Herbie was a male but I am not sure of germanic gender terms
>
>Retires waiting for onslaught from Adrian...............:-)
Onslaught? Moi?
Actually, I know little about the German language (or about most other
things, according to many). But I believe it *does* have genders
(does it?), so I guess they would include the German of "masculine"
and "feminine".
Tony Clayton
It is said that an attempt was made to be PC with Manchester
University's Charter, but unfortunately the new document referred
to Personchester University throughout....
>
>
> KGB
>
--
Tony Clayton tony.cla...@pem.cam.ac.uk
Coins of the UK : http://www.coinsoftheuk.info
Sent using RISCOS on an Acorn Strong Arm RiscPC
... As I said before, I never repeat myself.
Alastair
wrote:
>
>On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 10:11:01 GMT, alas...@as3jg.freeuk.com (Alastair)
>wrote:
>
>>I thought the 'man' part of chairman was derived from 'manage' as is
>>the case for 'seaman'.
>
>You think you can manage the sea?
>
Well, if we are using the modern interpretation of manage, as in "He
is a successful manager at Railtrack" then yes, I can.
--
Alastair
Brian Dominic
<tony.cla...@pem.cam.ac.uk> picked up their glass of wine, sat
back and said:
>It is said that an attempt was made to be PC with Manchester
>University's Charter, but unfortunately the new document referred
>to Personchester University throughout....
LOL!!!
Brian L Dominic
Web Sites:
Canals: http://www.brianscanalpages.co.uk
Friends of the Cromford Canal: http://www.cromfordcanal.org.uk
(Waterways World Site of the Month, November 2005)
Mid-Derbyshire Light Railway: http://www.mdlr.co.uk
Newsgroup readers should note that the reply-to address is NOT read:
To email me, please send to brian(dot)dominic(at)tiscali(dot)co(dot)uk
Brian J Goggin
wrote:
>I was not aping the dictum of a Central Committee. I was suggesting
>to the English speaking population that it not "choose another" usage
>when the existing one is just fine. Especially when the replacement
>is awful.
But some folk don't agree with you. They are as entitled to their
usage as you are entitled to yours. Your judgement that something is
"just fine" has no greater weight than any of your other personal
preferences; I was merely concerned to point out that, great though
your eloquence (and indeed admirable though your charm, your sterling
character and the view from your front door ) may be, you speak with
no more authority than does the Chair of the Hackney Committee on
Trans-Gendered, Gay-Adjacent and Differently Abled Communities.
>The problem with PC is that the PCites seem to have intimidated many
>of the rest of the population into worrying that they (the rest) will
>be seen as bad people if they don't adopt such usages as
>"differently-abled". I feel intimidation is a poor justification for
>language evolution.
Poor diddums. All intimidated, are you? Dear oh dear.
Bear up, though: worse things happen in war.
And remember that your worry may simply be the nagging of a guilty
conscience.
bjg
Mike Stevens
> On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 09:31:49 +0000, Adrian Stott <adr...@spam.com>
> wrote:
>> The problem with PC is that the PCites seem to have intimidated many
>> of the rest of the population into worrying that they (the rest) will
>> be seen as bad people if they don't adopt such usages as
>> "differently-abled". I feel intimidation is a poor justification for
>> language evolution.
What tosh (in my opinion). "Differently abled" is a phrase I've not come
across for a long time (and most people who believe in the existence of what
they call PC would accuse me of suffering from it). There's nothing wrong
with the word "disabled". It was out of favour in some circles for a while,
but was rehabilitated with the passing of the Disability Discrimination Act.
Although in practice, the word "disabled" is only of any use when one is
talking in very broad legal or policy terms. In most everyday situations it
is much more to the point to refer to the individual disability such as
"partially sighted", "hearing impaired", "limited mobility", "wheelchair
user" etc.
> And remember that your worry may simply be the nagging of a guilty
> conscience.
That too, perhaps.
Adrian Stott
<myinitialsATmyorganization.ie> wrote:
>On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 09:31:49 +0000, Adrian Stott <adr...@spam.com>
>wrote:
>
>>I was not aping the dictum of a Central Committee. I was suggesting
>>to the English speaking population that it not "choose another" usage
>>when the existing one is just fine. Especially when the replacement
>>is awful.
>
>But some folk don't agree with you. They are as entitled to their
>usage as you are entitled to yours.
Certainly. I'm just hoping they will see the light soon.
>Poor diddums. All intimidated, are you? Dear oh dear.
Obviously not, as I am seldom PC.
>And remember that your worry may simply be the nagging of a guilty
>conscience.
But I'm not worrying. Since the premise is false ...
I am, however, reminded of Brecht "The man who laughs has not yet
heard the terrible news".
On Sat, 21 Jan 2006 11:09:37 -0000, "Mike Stevens"
<michael...@which.net> wrote:
>> On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 09:31:49 +0000, Adrian Stott <adr...@spam.com>
>> wrote:
>What tosh (in my opinion). "Differently abled" is a phrase I've not come
>across for a long time
Sorry, Mike, would you have preferred "vertically-challenged" as an
example?
Alastair
wrote:
>
>Sorry, Mike, would you have preferred "vertically-challenged" as an
>example?
>
Is that someone who has had much too much to drink?
--
Alastair
Brian J Goggin
wrote:
No: it's a bloke who insists that size isn't everything.
bjg
Peter Stockdale
"Brian J Goggin" <myinitialsATmyorganization.ie> wrote in message
news:bi5at1hcdhq3q27v3...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>Sorry, Mike, would you have preferred "vertically-challenged" as an
>>>example?
>>>
>>
>>Is that someone who has had much too much to drink?
>
> No: it's a bloke who insists that size isn't everything.
>
> bjg
suffering from brewers droop perhaps ?
Pete
Brian J Goggin
<peter....@btopenworld.com> wrote:
>suffering from brewers droop perhaps ?
Coq au vin.
bjg
Mike Stevens
I've never heard that one outside comedy shows. Like many othe often-quoted
examples of so-called PC language,
I suspect it's entirely apocryphal.
Peter Stockdale
>
>
> I've never heard that one outside comedy shows. Like many othe
> often-quoted
> examples of so-called PC language,
> I suspect it's entirely apocryphal.
>
>
> --
> Mike Stevens
I suspect that many of us are now examining our dictionaries to discover
just you suspect in it's entirety !
Davebt
> "Andy Champ" <no....@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:WISdnbq3EMnnOlfe...@pipex.net...
>> Neil Corbett wrote:
>>
>>> Boats are usually referred to as she, but what do you do if it has a
>>> male name e.g. George? I need to know!
>>
>> Ships are always She. An example:
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_King_George_V_(1939)
>>
>> A battleship named after a King is surely about as male as they could
>> get! I have no idea why this should be the case however...
>>
>> http://www.usni.org/navalhistory/Articles98/NHfoley.htm
>>
>> I imagine the same applies to boats.
>>
>> Oh yes - "A ship may carry a boat, but a boat never carries a ship" -
>> and that's probably a misquote, 'cos I can't trace it.
>>
>> Andy
>
> Ship has a captain, a boat a skipper.
> Jo
My father always said that a ship carries boats, but of course, that wasn't
applied to subs, which have always been referred top as "boats", and they
sometimes carried collapsible boats.........
I wonder what they called floating dry docks - THEY carried ships!
And the SHIP the Great Britain, was brought back to Britain on a
barge........but barges are ships, and carry boats.....!
Dave n.b. Hailey Wood.
Davebt
> On Mon, 16 Jan 2006 11:00:32 +0100, "Mike Ricletts"
> <Michael....@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
>
>>
>> "Alastair" <alas...@as3jg.freeuk.com> wrote in message
>> news:43cab03e...@news.metronet.co.uk...
>>> On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 16:32:34 GMT, "Neil Corbett"
>>> <neil.c...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Boats are usually referred to as she, but what do you do if it has
>>>> a male name e.g. George? I need to know!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> considered their boats to be male.
>>>
>> The French language also treats them as male ie le bateau rather
>> than la bateau.
>>
>
> But it's la peniche. Barges are female <g>
>
> Cheers
> Tim
and gender in French has nothing to do with the sex of the object.
Dave n.b. Hailey Wood
Davebt
> Brian J Goggin wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 09:31:49 +0000, Adrian Stott <adr...@spam.com>
it is much more to the point to refer to the individual
> disability such as "hearing impaired", >
Surely you mean - "slightly deaf"!
Pardon?
Whats that you say.....? :)
Dave, shouting loudly and waving his hands about.........