Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > alt.usage.english > #1146158 > unrolled thread

'shake well'

Back to article view | Back to alt.usage.english

Contents

  'shake well' Rich Ulrich <rich.ulrich@comcast.net> - 2026-07-03 22:33 -0400
    Re: 'shake well' Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> - 2026-07-04 00:03 -0400
      Re: 'shake well' Snidely <snidely.too@gmail.com> - 2026-07-03 23:05 -0700
      Re: 'shake well' occam <occam@nowhere.nix> - 2026-07-04 12:02 +0200
        Re: 'shake well' Rich Ulrich <rich.ulrich@comcast.net> - 2026-07-04 08:46 -0400
          Re: 'shake well' Bertel Lund Hansen <rundtosset@lundhansen.dk> - 2026-07-04 20:26 +0200
        Re: 'shake well' Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> - 2026-07-04 09:28 -0400
      Re: 'shake well' Adam Funk <a24061@ducksburg.com> - 2026-07-06 15:33 +0100
        Re: 'shake well' richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Richard Tobin) - 2026-07-06 14:52 +0000
          Re: 'shake well' Adam Funk <a24061@ducksburg.com> - 2026-07-07 19:49 +0100
            Re: 'shake well' richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Richard Tobin) - 2026-07-07 19:38 +0000
            Re: 'shake well' Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> - 2026-07-08 21:04 +0100
              Re: 'shake well' Phil <phil@anonymous.invalid> - 2026-07-08 23:44 +0100
                Re: 'shake well' Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> - 2026-07-09 00:45 +0100
        Re: 'shake well' occam <occam@nowhere.nix> - 2026-07-06 17:04 +0200
        Re: 'shake well' Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> - 2026-07-06 11:14 -0400
          Re: 'shake well' Adam Funk <a24061@ducksburg.com> - 2026-07-07 19:50 +0100
            Re: 'shake well' Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> - 2026-07-07 16:21 -0400
              Re: 'shake well' Nick Canuck <the_bay898@hotmail.com> - 2026-07-07 23:28 +0000
        Re: 'shake well' athel.cb@gmail.com <user12588@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-07-06 15:41 +0000
          Re: 'shake well' occam <occam@nowhere.nix> - 2026-07-06 20:34 +0200
            Re: 'shake well' nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-07-06 22:34 +0200
          Re: 'shake well' Adam Funk <a24061@ducksburg.com> - 2026-07-07 19:53 +0100
        Re: 'shake well' Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> - 2026-07-06 20:34 +0100
          Re: 'shake well' Adam Funk <a24061@ducksburg.com> - 2026-07-07 19:51 +0100
        Re: 'shake well' rcpj@panix.com (Pierre Jelenc) - 2026-07-06 20:21 +0000
          Re: 'shake well' Adam Funk <a24061@ducksburg.com> - 2026-07-07 19:51 +0100
            Re: 'shake well' Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> - 2026-07-08 21:07 +0100
    Re: 'shake well' Hibou <vpaereru-unmonitored@yahoo.com.invalid> - 2026-07-04 06:38 +0100
      Re: 'shake well' Bertel Lund Hansen <rundtosset@lundhansen.dk> - 2026-07-04 08:49 +0200
    Re: 'shake well' Hibou <vpaereru-unmonitored@yahoo.com.invalid> - 2026-07-04 06:51 +0100
      Re: 'shake well' Rich Ulrich <rich.ulrich@comcast.net> - 2026-07-04 08:48 -0400
    Re: 'shake well' occam <occam@nowhere.nix> - 2026-07-04 08:28 +0200
    Re: 'shake well' Bertel Lund Hansen <rundtosset@lundhansen.dk> - 2026-07-04 08:43 +0200
      Re: 'shake well' Hibou <vpaereru-unmonitored@yahoo.com.invalid> - 2026-07-04 08:02 +0100
        Re: 'shake well' nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-07-04 11:53 +0200
        Re: 'shake well' Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> - 2026-07-04 20:05 +0100
      Re: 'shake well' Ross Clark <benlizro@ihug.co.nz> - 2026-07-04 22:59 +1200
        Re: 'shake well' occam <occam@nowhere.nix> - 2026-07-04 16:25 +0200
          Re: 'shake well' HVS <office@REMOVETHISwhhvs.co.uk> - 2026-07-04 16:11 +0100
            Re: 'shake well' Hibou <vpaereru-unmonitored@yahoo.com.invalid> - 2026-07-04 16:27 +0100
            Re: 'shake well' richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Richard Tobin) - 2026-07-04 15:40 +0000
              Re: 'shake well' Aidan Kehoe <kehoea@parhasard.net> - 2026-07-05 10:06 +0100
          Re: 'shake well' Charles Hope <clh@candehope.me.uk> - 2026-07-04 16:00 +0000
          Re: 'shake well' Ross Clark <benlizro@ihug.co.nz> - 2026-07-05 18:05 +1200
            Re: 'shake well' occam <occam@nowhere.nix> - 2026-07-05 08:45 +0200
      Re: 'shake well' Rich Ulrich <rich.ulrich@comcast.net> - 2026-07-04 08:39 -0400
    Re: 'shake well' nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-07-04 11:53 +0200
      Re: 'shake well' occam <occam@nowhere.nix> - 2026-07-04 12:05 +0200
        Re: 'shake well' liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Liz Tuddenham) - 2026-07-04 12:29 +0100
          Re: 'shake well' Snidely <snidely.too@gmail.com> - 2026-07-05 00:20 -0700
          Re: 'shake well' nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-07-05 09:22 +0200
    Re: 'shake well' "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2026-07-04 21:49 +0800
    Re: 'shake well' Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> - 2026-07-04 20:01 +0100

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

#1146342

On 06/07/2026 17:41, athel.cb@gmail.com wrote:
> 
<snip>

>>
> Back in 1962 I had a summer job in a chemical research laboratory belonging
> to a brewery. Neither the lady supervising me nor I had any experience, or
> even much theoretical knowledge, of chromatography on Sephadex (dextran beads),
> and we weren't happy that the Sephadex column that we prepared didn't seem to
> be packed very evenly, and had air bubbles. To fix it, we tied a string around
> the open end, and swung it round in the way you describe. To be safe, or at
> least to be less obviously dangerous, we did it outside in a place there weren't
> any people walking around. Even so, it was incredibly stupid and dangerous. If
> it had become detached the pointed end would have made it into a javelin that 
> could kill anyone it hit.
> 

Ah, the swinging 60s! Those were fun times.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1146356

occam <occam@nowhere.nix> wrote:

> On 06/07/2026 17:41, athel.cb@gmail.com wrote:
> > 
> <snip>
> 
> >>
> > Back in 1962 I had a summer job in a chemical research laboratory
> > belonging to a brewery. Neither the lady supervising me nor I had any
> > experience, or even much theoretical knowledge, of chromatography on
> > Sephadex (dextran beads), and we weren't happy that the Sephadex column
> > that we prepared didn't seem to be packed very evenly, and had air
> > bubbles. To fix it, we tied a string around the open end, and swung it
> > round in the way you describe. To be safe, or at least to be less
> > obviously dangerous, we did it outside in a place there weren't any
> > people walking around. Even so, it was incredibly stupid and dangerous.
> > If it had become detached the pointed end would have made it into a
> > javelin that could kill anyone it hit.
> > 
> 
> Ah, the swinging 60s! Those were fun times.

The year for swinging hammers was 1984,

Jan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1146467

On 2026-07-06, athel.cb  gmail.com wrote:

>
> Adam Funk <a24061@ducksburg.com> posted:
>
>
> [ ... ]
>
>> 
>> You can attach the bottle to string & swing it around to centrifuge
>> the contents towards the nozzle. I have occasionally done this, with
>> no mishaps, but I would only do it outdoors.
>> 
> Back in 1962 I had a summer job in a chemical research laboratory belonging
> to a brewery. Neither the lady supervising me nor I had any experience, or
> even much theoretical knowledge, of chromatography on Sephadex (dextran beads),
> and we weren't happy that the Sephadex column that we prepared didn't seem to
> be packed very evenly, and had air bubbles. To fix it, we tied a string around
> the open end, and swung it round in the way you describe. To be safe, or at
> least to be less obviously dangerous, we did it outside in a place there weren't
> any people walking around. Even so, it was incredibly stupid and dangerous. If
> it had become detached the pointed end would have made it into a javelin that 
> could kill anyone it hit.


I guess the key here is the shape and mass of the column rather than
the contents? (But obviously caustic contents would be even worse.)


-- 
SHALL WE PLAY A GAME?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1146348

On 06/07/2026 15:33, Adam Funk wrote:
> On 2026-07-04, Tony Cooper wrote:
> 
> ...
>> The two eldest grandsons (21 & 20) are health food addicts.  They make
>> healthy veggie, fruit, and berry smoothies ever morning laced with
>> protein powder and other supplements.  They work out in a gym four or
>> five days a week, and make smoothies after that.  They won't touch
>> carbonated beverages.
> 
> I don't think there's anything wrong with carbonation --- I assume
> they are avoiding sugar & artificial sweeteners. (I drink a lot of
> carbonated water & I think it's nutritionally just water.)
> 
> 
>> OK...I've covered your bitch...now for mine:  Many products -
>> mustards, for example - now come only in squeezable bottles.  "The
>> Hulk" couldn't squeeze more than 80% of the contents of any of them,
>> and it gets increasingly difficult to get the first 50% out.
> 
> You can attach the bottle to string & swing it around to centrifuge
> the contents towards the nozzle. I have occasionally done this, with
> no mishaps, but I would only do it outdoors.

Have your neighbours ever commented on this?
(Or did you get the idea from them in the first place?)

-- 
Sam Plusnet

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1146468

On 2026-07-06, Sam Plusnet wrote:

> On 06/07/2026 15:33, Adam Funk wrote:
>> On 2026-07-04, Tony Cooper wrote:

>>> OK...I've covered your bitch...now for mine:  Many products -
>>> mustards, for example - now come only in squeezable bottles.  "The
>>> Hulk" couldn't squeeze more than 80% of the contents of any of them,
>>> and it gets increasingly difficult to get the first 50% out.
>> 
>> You can attach the bottle to string & swing it around to centrifuge
>> the contents towards the nozzle. I have occasionally done this, with
>> no mishaps, but I would only do it outdoors.
>
> Have your neighbours ever commented on this?
> (Or did you get the idea from them in the first place?)

No; no. I haven't done it for a while.


-- 
SHALL WE PLAY A GAME?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1146350

In article <0vqshmxqff.ln2@news.ducksburg.com>,
Adam Funk  <a24061@ducksburg.com> wrote:
>On 2026-07-04, Tony Cooper wrote:
>
>...
>> The two eldest grandsons (21 & 20) are health food addicts.  They make
>> healthy veggie, fruit, and berry smoothies ever morning laced with
>> protein powder and other supplements.  They work out in a gym four or
>> five days a week, and make smoothies after that.  They won't touch
>> carbonated beverages.
>
>I don't think there's anything wrong with carbonation --- I assume
>they are avoiding sugar & artificial sweeteners. (I drink a lot of
>carbonated water & I think it's nutritionally just water.)
>
>
>> OK...I've covered your bitch...now for mine:  Many products -
>> mustards, for example - now come only in squeezable bottles.  "The
>> Hulk" couldn't squeeze more than 80% of the contents of any of them,
>> and it gets increasingly difficult to get the first 50% out.
>
>You can attach the bottle to string & swing it around to centrifuge
>the contents towards the nozzle. I have occasionally done this, with
>no mishaps, but I would only do it outdoors.

I use a decommissioned knee-high athletic tube sock. Nothing to tie and 
you get a better grip than on a string, so less risk of the squeeze bottle 
flying off. 

Pierre
-- 
Pierre Jelenc	
		The Gigometer		www.gigometer.com
                The NYC Beer Guide      www.nycbeer.org

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1146465

On 2026-07-06, Pierre Jelenc wrote:

> In article <0vqshmxqff.ln2@news.ducksburg.com>,
> Adam Funk  <a24061@ducksburg.com> wrote:
>>On 2026-07-04, Tony Cooper wrote:

>>> OK...I've covered your bitch...now for mine:  Many products -
>>> mustards, for example - now come only in squeezable bottles.  "The
>>> Hulk" couldn't squeeze more than 80% of the contents of any of them,
>>> and it gets increasingly difficult to get the first 50% out.
>>
>>You can attach the bottle to string & swing it around to centrifuge
>>the contents towards the nozzle. I have occasionally done this, with
>>no mishaps, but I would only do it outdoors.
>
> I use a decommissioned knee-high athletic tube sock. Nothing to tie and 
> you get a better grip than on a string, so less risk of the squeeze bottle 
> flying off. 

That's a much better idea --- thanks for the tip!


-- 
XML combines the efficiency of text files with the readability of
binary files.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1146534

On 07/07/2026 19:51, Adam Funk wrote:
> On 2026-07-06, Pierre Jelenc wrote:
> 
>> In article <0vqshmxqff.ln2@news.ducksburg.com>,
>> Adam Funk  <a24061@ducksburg.com> wrote:
>>> On 2026-07-04, Tony Cooper wrote:
> 
>>>> OK...I've covered your bitch...now for mine:  Many products -
>>>> mustards, for example - now come only in squeezable bottles.  "The
>>>> Hulk" couldn't squeeze more than 80% of the contents of any of them,
>>>> and it gets increasingly difficult to get the first 50% out.
>>>
>>> You can attach the bottle to string & swing it around to centrifuge
>>> the contents towards the nozzle. I have occasionally done this, with
>>> no mishaps, but I would only do it outdoors.
>>
>> I use a decommissioned knee-high athletic tube sock. Nothing to tie and
>> you get a better grip than on a string, so less risk of the squeeze bottle
>> flying off.
> 
> That's a much better idea --- thanks for the tip!
> 
> 
I have never received a single penny in commission from any sock I 
owned.  Perhaps they were all decommissioned before I bought them?

-- 
Sam Plusnet

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1146167

Le 04/07/2026 à 03:33, Rich Ulrich a écrit :
> 
> What do you do?


Faced with "Shake well before using", I tremble, shiver, and quake like… 
a Quaker.

Quakers are entirely without sediment. (They do get their oats, though.)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1146172

Den 04.07.2026 kl. 07.38 skrev Hibou:

> Le 04/07/2026 à 03:33, Rich Ulrich a écrit :
>>
>> What do you do?
> 
> 
> Faced with "Shake well before using", I tremble, shiver, and quake like… 
> a Quaker.

Reminds me of a comic strip,  Beetle Bailey, where private Zero is asked 
to shake a can of paint. We then see him jumping, skipping, shaking and 
so on - but the only item that remains steady is the can of paint.

-- 
Bertel, Kolt, Danmark

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1146168

Le 04/07/2026 à 03:33, Rich Ulrich a écrit :
> Useful vs un-useful instructions:
> 
> Spray paint comes in sealed containers that say "shake well"
> and that make that functional by  including inside some heavy
> ball bearing -- you can listed to it rattle around, as it stirs and
> mixes.
> 
> But my lifetime experience with other sealed containers has
> taught me that a juice container (say) with sediment on the
> bottom will NOT be mixed by shaking unless there is air inside.
> You can shake it and SEE that the sediment is not affected.
> But they still may say, 'shake well'.
> 
> Half-empty makes for effective mix-by-shaking. which may  be
> okay if you are pouring everything back together. [...]


What if you turn the container on its side and then tap it on a hard 
surface? Does that dislodge the sediment?

I've just tried this with a bottle of lemon juice. It worked; the 
sediment lifted off the bottom, and I could see it swirling round in the 
liquid. A few vigorous rotations sufficed to distribute it.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1146193

On Sat, 4 Jul 2026 06:51:17 +0100, Hibou
<vpaereru-unmonitored@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:

>Le 04/07/2026 à 03:33, Rich Ulrich a écrit :
>> Useful vs un-useful instructions:
>> 
>> Spray paint comes in sealed containers that say "shake well"
>> and that make that functional by  including inside some heavy
>> ball bearing -- you can listed to it rattle around, as it stirs and
>> mixes.
>> 
>> But my lifetime experience with other sealed containers has
>> taught me that a juice container (say) with sediment on the
>> bottom will NOT be mixed by shaking unless there is air inside.
>> You can shake it and SEE that the sediment is not affected.
>> But they still may say, 'shake well'.
>> 
>> Half-empty makes for effective mix-by-shaking. which may  be
>> okay if you are pouring everything back together. [...]
>
>
>What if you turn the container on its side and then tap it on a hard 
>surface? Does that dislodge the sediment?

Just because it sounds useful, that is something I will try.  But
 - cardboard - I can't see what works. 
>
>I've just tried this with a bottle of lemon juice. It worked; the 
>sediment lifted off the bottom, and I could see it swirling round in the 
>liquid. A few vigorous rotations sufficed to distribute it.

-- 
Rich Ulrich 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1146170

On 04/07/2026 04:33, Rich Ulrich wrote:
> Useful vs un-useful instructions: 
> 
> Spray paint comes in sealed containers that say "shake well" 
> and that make that functional by  including inside some heavy
> ball bearing -- you can listed to it rattle around, as it stirs and
> mixes. 
> 
> But my lifetime experience with other sealed containers has
> taught me that a juice container (say) with sediment on the
> bottom will NOT be mixed by shaking unless there is air inside. 
> You can shake it and SEE that the sediment is not affected. 
> But they still may say, 'shake well'.  
> 
> 
> Half-empty makes for effective mix-by-shaking. which may  be 
> okay if you are pouring everything back together.  
> 
> If the container is transparent (even, just at the bottom), you
> can see what is stuck on the bottom.  But what do you do for
> a cardboard container? 
> 
> I have 250ml boxes of food ssupplement (like Boost or Ensure),
> with a small cap; filled to the brim.  I want to pour HALF a 
> container, after mixing.  I have not found a proper stick for
> stirring, and I haven't tried somegthing like tying a thread on
> a nut, to make a removable bounce-mixer.  
> 
> I suppose that a vibrator might work some for this mixture,
> but the only 'vibrating' instrument I have is my iPhone, 
> which does not shake all that vigorously. 
> 
> What do you do? 

You've had the sensible suggestions. Here comes the geek suggestion:
 Drop a /clean/ steel ball bearing into the bottle (cf. spray can). Now
shake the bottle - holding it vertically - so as to force the ball
bearing to go round the base of the bottle (think Evel Knievel, riding a
motorbike in a large barrel).

[Background]  We discussed old ink bottles here in AUE in the past. This
is the method they used to use to stop inks from forming sediments in
bottles. ]

P.S. A small glass marble will also do, but these don't come as small as
ball bearings.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1146171

Den 04.07.2026 kl. 04.33 skrev Rich Ulrich:

> But my lifetime experience with other sealed containers has
> taught me that a juice container (say) with sediment on the
> bottom will NOT be mixed by shaking unless there is air inside.
> You can shake it and SEE that the sediment is not affected.
> But they still may say, 'shake well'.
> 
> 
> Half-empty makes for effective mix-by-shaking. which may  be
> okay if you are pouring everything back together.
> 
> If the container is transparent (even, just at the bottom), you
> can see what is stuck on the bottom.  But what do you do for
> a cardboard container?

My father provides orange juice for me when I visit him. I don't usually 
drink juice due to the acidic contents, but I enjoy doing so occasionally.

The container is made of cardboard. If it is full, I just pour a glass 
and drink it. Then I can shake the container for the next glass(es).

Related - and Danish:
There's a word about the sediment that may be found in wine bottles 
("bærme"). The same word can be used about people meaning that they are 
worthless. I haven't heard that word since my parents explained it to me 
and I haven't used it about anything else than the residue in wine 
bottles - which I think I have seen once.

-- 
Bertel, Kolt, Danmark

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1146173

Le 04/07/2026 à 07:43, Bertel Lund Hansen a écrit :
> 
> Related - and Danish:
> There's a word about the sediment that may be found in wine bottles 
> ("bærme"). The same word can be used about people meaning that they are 
> worthless. I haven't heard that word since my parents explained it to me 
> and I haven't used it about anything else than the residue in wine 
> bottles - which I think I have seen once.


In English, 'lees' in wine or beer, 'dregs' more generally, for coffee 
etc.. 'Dregs' is also used pejoratively, e.g. the dregs of society.

'Lie' in French, also used pejoratively - la lie du peuple etc..

'Lees' from Old French, 'dregs' from Old Norse (Collins). As so often in 
English, two words in a job-sharing arrangement.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1146181

Hibou <vpaereru-unmonitored@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:

> Le 04/07/2026 à 07:43, Bertel Lund Hansen a écrit :
> > 
> > Related - and Danish:
> > There's a word about the sediment that may be found in wine bottles
> > ("bærme"). The same word can be used about people meaning that they are
> > worthless. I haven't heard that word since my parents explained it to me
> > and I haven't used it about anything else than the residue in wine 
> > bottles - which I think I have seen once.
> 
> 
> In English, 'lees' in wine or beer, 'dregs' more generally, for coffee
> etc.. 'Dregs' is also used pejoratively, e.g. the dregs of society.
> 
> 'Lie' in French, also used pejoratively - la lie du peuple etc..
> 
> 'Lees' from Old French, 'dregs' from Old Norse (Collins). As so often in
> English, two words in a job-sharing arrangement.

What have you got against Muscadet?

Jan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1146215

On 04/07/2026 08:02, Hibou wrote:
> Le 04/07/2026 à 07:43, Bertel Lund Hansen a écrit :
>>
>> Related - and Danish:
>> There's a word about the sediment that may be found in wine bottles 
>> ("bærme"). The same word can be used about people meaning that they 
>> are worthless. I haven't heard that word since my parents explained it 
>> to me and I haven't used it about anything else than the residue in 
>> wine bottles - which I think I have seen once.
> 
> 
> In English, 'lees' in wine or beer, 'dregs' more generally, for coffee 
> etc.. 'Dregs' is also used pejoratively, e.g. the dregs of society.
> 
> 'Lie' in French, also used pejoratively - la lie du peuple etc..
> 
> 'Lees' from Old French, 'dregs' from Old Norse (Collins). As so often in 
> English, two words in a job-sharing arrangement.
> 
Compare "bærme" with "barm", a Northern English & Scottish word for 
yeast.  People who are thought to be stupid or crazy used to be 
described as barmy.

-- 
Sam Plusnet

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1146189

On 4/07/2026 6:43 p.m., Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
> Den 04.07.2026 kl. 04.33 skrev Rich Ulrich:
> 
>> But my lifetime experience with other sealed containers has
>> taught me that a juice container (say) with sediment on the
>> bottom will NOT be mixed by shaking unless there is air inside.
>> You can shake it and SEE that the sediment is not affected.
>> But they still may say, 'shake well'.
>>
>>
>> Half-empty makes for effective mix-by-shaking. which may  be
>> okay if you are pouring everything back together.
>>
>> If the container is transparent (even, just at the bottom), you
>> can see what is stuck on the bottom.  But what do you do for
>> a cardboard container?
> 
> My father provides orange juice for me when I visit him. I don't usually 
> drink juice due to the acidic contents, but I enjoy doing so occasionally.
> 
> The container is made of cardboard. If it is full, I just pour a glass 
> and drink it. Then I can shake the container for the next glass(es).
> 
> Related - and Danish:
> There's a word about the sediment that may be found in wine bottles 
> ("bærme"). The same word can be used about people meaning that they are 
> worthless. I haven't heard that word since my parents explained it to me 
> and I haven't used it about anything else than the residue in wine 
> bottles - which I think I have seen once.
> 

Cf. English: barmy (sometimes spelled balmy) 'crazy, stupid'
from barm 'froth on fermenting malt liquor'   (COD)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1146201

On 04/07/2026 12:59, Ross Clark wrote:
> On 4/07/2026 6:43 p.m., Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
>> Den 04.07.2026 kl. 04.33 skrev Rich Ulrich:
>>
>>> But my lifetime experience with other sealed containers has
>>> taught me that a juice container (say) with sediment on the
>>> bottom will NOT be mixed by shaking unless there is air inside.
>>> You can shake it and SEE that the sediment is not affected.
>>> But they still may say, 'shake well'.
>>>
>>>
>>> Half-empty makes for effective mix-by-shaking. which may  be
>>> okay if you are pouring everything back together.
>>>
>>> If the container is transparent (even, just at the bottom), you
>>> can see what is stuck on the bottom.  But what do you do for
>>> a cardboard container?
>>
>> My father provides orange juice for me when I visit him. I don't
>> usually drink juice due to the acidic contents, but I enjoy doing so
>> occasionally.
>>
>> The container is made of cardboard. If it is full, I just pour a glass
>> and drink it. Then I can shake the container for the next glass(es).
>>
>> Related - and Danish:
>> There's a word about the sediment that may be found in wine bottles
>> ("bærme"). The same word can be used about people meaning that they
>> are worthless. I haven't heard that word since my parents explained it
>> to me and I haven't used it about anything else than the residue in
>> wine bottles - which I think I have seen once.
>>
> 
> Cf. English: barmy (sometimes spelled balmy) 'crazy, stupid'
> from barm 'froth on fermenting malt liquor'   (COD)

Sorry, which dictionary is COD? 'balmy' in my speech is 'pleasant' as in
'balmy summer nights'. It's barmy if it shares the same spelling with
'crazy' barmy.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1146204

On 04 Jul 2026, occam wrote

> On 04/07/2026 12:59, Ross Clark wrote:
>> On 4/07/2026 6:43 p.m., Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
>>> Den 04.07.2026 kl. 04.33 skrev Rich Ulrich:
>>> 
>>>> But my lifetime experience with other sealed containers has
>>>> taught me that a juice container (say) with sediment on the
>>>> bottom will NOT be mixed by shaking unless there is air inside.
>>>> You can shake it and SEE that the sediment is not affected.
>>>> But they still may say, 'shake well'.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Half-empty makes for effective mix-by-shaking. which may  be
>>>> okay if you are pouring everything back together.
>>>> 
>>>> If the container is transparent (even, just at the bottom), you
>>>> can see what is stuck on the bottom.  But what do you do for
>>>> a cardboard container?
>>> 
>>> My father provides orange juice for me when I visit him. I don't
>>> usually drink juice due to the acidic contents, but I enjoy
>>> doing so occasionally.
>>> 
>>> The container is made of cardboard. If it is full, I just pour a
>>> glass and drink it. Then I can shake the container for the next
>>> glass(es). 
>>> 
>>> Related - and Danish:
>>> There's a word about the sediment that may be found in wine
>>> bottles ("bærme"). The same word can be used about people
>>> meaning that they are worthless. I haven't heard that word since
>>> my parents explained it to me and I haven't used it about
>>> anything else than the residue in wine bottles - which I think I
>>> have seen once. 
>>> 
>> 
>> Cf. English: barmy (sometimes spelled balmy) 'crazy, stupid'
>> from barm 'froth on fermenting malt liquor'   (COD)
> 
> Sorry, which dictionary is COD? 

Concise Oxford Dictionary, I believe.

-- 
Cheers, Harvey

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | alt.usage.english

csiph-web