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

Groups > alt.usage.english > #1151750 > unrolled thread

The proof is in the pudding, or where to get physical dictionaries of idioms?

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

Contents

  The proof is in the pudding, or where to get physical dictionaries of idioms? Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-10-04 10:41 +0800
    Chauserian Poetry (was: Re: The proof is in the pudding, or where to get physical dictionaries of idioms?) Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-10-04 10:53 +0800
      Re: Chauserian Poetry occam <occam@nowhere.nix> - 2026-10-04 09:07 +0200
        Re: Chiuicerian Poetry Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-10-04 19:18 +0800
          Re: Chiuicerian Poetry occam <occam@nowhere.nix> - 2026-10-04 13:32 +0200
    Re: The proof is in the pudding, or where to get physical dictionaries of idioms? Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org> - 2026-10-04 15:16 +1100
      Re: The proof is in the pudding, or where to get physical dictionaries of idioms? Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-10-04 12:26 +0800
    Re: The proof is in the pudding, or where to get physical dictionaries of idioms? Bertel Lund Hansen <rundtosset@lundhansen.dk> - 2026-10-04 09:54 +0200
      Re: The proof is in the pudding, or where to get physical dictionaries of idioms? Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org> - 2026-10-04 20:56 +1100
        Re: The proof is in the pudding, or where to get physical dictionaries of idioms? Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-10-04 18:56 +0800
          Re: The proof is in the pudding, or where to get physical dictionaries of idioms? Bertel Lund Hansen <rundtosset@lundhansen.dk> - 2026-10-04 13:22 +0200
            Re: The proof is in the pudding, or where to get physical  dictionaries of idioms? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-10-04 11:18 -0700
          Re: The proof is in the pudding, or where to get physical dictionaries of idioms? Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org> - 2026-10-05 10:17 +1100
        Re: The proof is in the pudding, or where to get physical dictionaries of idioms? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-10-04 11:22 -0700
        Re: The proof is in the pudding, or where to get physical dictionaries of idioms? Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> - 2026-10-04 19:53 +0100
      Re: The proof is in the pudding, or where to get physical dictionaries of idioms? Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-10-04 18:59 +0800
        Re: The proof is in the pudding, or where to get physical dictionaries of idioms? ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) - 2026-10-04 11:13 +0000
        Re: The proof is in the pudding, or where to get physical dictionaries of idioms? Bertel Lund Hansen <rundtosset@lundhansen.dk> - 2026-10-04 13:25 +0200
    Re: The proof is in the pudding, or where to get physical dictionaries of idioms? ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) - 2026-10-04 11:05 +0000
    Re: The proof is in the pudding, or where to get physical dictionaries of idioms? Paul Carmichael <wibbleypants@gmail.com> - 2026-10-04 13:29 +0000
    Re: The proof is in the pudding, or where to get physical dictionaries of idioms? Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> - 2026-10-04 11:23 -0400
      Re: The proof is in the pudding, or where to get physical dictionaries of idioms? Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> - 2026-10-04 13:46 -0400
        Re: The proof is in the pudding, or where to get physical dictionaries of idioms? Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-10-05 02:54 +0800
          Re: The proof is in the pudding, or where to get physical dictionaries of idioms? Bertel Lund Hansen <rundtosset@lundhansen.dk> - 2026-10-04 21:30 +0200
          Re: The proof is in the pudding, or where to get physical dictionaries of idioms? "Anders D. Nygaard" <news2012adn@google.com> - 2026-10-04 22:56 +0200
        Re: The proof is in the pudding, or where to get physical dictionaries of idioms? Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> - 2026-10-04 15:23 -0400
          Re: The proof is in the pudding, or where to get physical dictionaries of idioms? Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> - 2026-10-05 01:29 +0100
            Re: The proof is in the pudding, or where to get physical dictionaries of idioms? Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> - 2026-10-05 00:02 -0400
        Re: The proof is in the pudding, or where to get physical dictionaries of idioms? Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org> - 2026-10-05 10:41 +1100
          Re: The proof is in the pudding, or where to get physical dictionaries of idioms? Bertel Lund Hansen <rundtosset@lundhansen.dk> - 2026-10-05 09:41 +0200
        Re: The proof is in the pudding, or where to get physical dictionaries of idioms? Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> - 2026-10-05 04:26 +0200
      Re: The proof is in the pudding, or where to get physical dictionaries of idioms? Silvano <Silvano@noncisonopernessuno.it> - 2026-10-04 19:46 +0200
        Re: The proof is in the pudding, or where to get physical dictionaries of idioms? Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-10-05 02:58 +0800
        Re: The proof is in the pudding, or where to get physical dictionaries of idioms? Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> - 2026-10-04 15:18 -0400
          Re: The proof is in the pudding, or where to get physical dictionaries of idioms? Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-10-05 06:50 +0800
            Re: The proof is in the pudding, or where to get physical dictionaries of idioms? Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org> - 2026-10-05 10:35 +1100
          Re: The proof is in the pudding, or where to get physical dictionaries of idioms? Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> - 2026-10-05 04:32 +0200
    Re: The proof is in the pudding, or where to get physical dictionaries of idioms? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-10-04 11:11 -0700

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#1151750 — The proof is in the pudding, or where to get physical dictionaries of idioms?

Dear alt.usage.english,

Thinking of /the proof is in the pudding/ for a context outside the
scope of Usenet, I am now wondering how one would increase his or her
knowledge of idioms, without having to know each and every one before
hand?

For instance, I have no particular interest in looking at

   https://www.theidioms.com/

every day, even though that's probably both free and useful.

I know books of idioms have been published in Iceland, but as far as I'm
aware, nobody has suggested one for English.  Where did the Englishmen
of ages past learn their idioms and expressions?  I certainly hope they
didn't start with regular expressions in the 15th century.  But that
would probably have been Chauserian English, of which I don't know much,
sadly.

Maybe I'll pick up Chauserian English one of these days, but not today.
Today I thought to pick up a few more unknown-to-me idioms and express-
ions of more recent usage.


So, what do posters of alt.usage.english suggest?
-- 
Johann | email: invalid -> com | http://www.myrkraverk.com/blog/
I'm not from the Internet, I just work there. | via Easynews.com
https://bsky.app/profile/myrkraverk.bsky.social | for ( ;; ) _:;
Federated at https://fed.brid.gy/bsky/myrkraverk.bsky.social

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1151751 — Chauserian Poetry (was: Re: The proof is in the pudding, or where to get physical dictionaries of idioms?)

On 10/4/2026 10:41 AM, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
> Dear alt.usage.english,
> 
> Thinking of /the proof is in the pudding/ for a context outside the
> scope of Usenet, I am now wondering how one would increase his or her
> knowledge of idioms, without having to know each and every one before
> hand?
> 
> For instance, I have no particular interest in looking at
> 
>    https://www.theidioms.com/
> 
> every day, even though that's probably both free and useful.
> 
> I know books of idioms have been published in Iceland, but as far as I'm
> aware, nobody has suggested one for English.  Where did the Englishmen
> of ages past learn their idioms and expressions?  I certainly hope they
> didn't start with regular expressions in the 15th century.  But that
> would probably have been Chauserian English, of which I don't know much,
> sadly.
> 
> Maybe I'll pick up Chauserian English one of these days, but not today.
> Today I thought to pick up a few more unknown-to-me idioms and express-
> ions of more recent usage.
> 
> 
> So, what do posters of alt.usage.english suggest?

Thinking about it a little further, I picked up a copy of Chauser in a
library,

   https://archive.org/details/completeworksge00unkngoog/page/n35/mode/1up

and looking at that page we have

   Al hoolly youres, withouten otheres part!
     Wherefore? y-wis, that I ne can ne may
   My service chaungen; thus of al suche art        [1]
     The lerninge I desyre for ever and ay.
     And evermore, whyl that I live may,
   In trouthe I wol your servant stille abyde,
     Although my wo encrese day by day,             [2]
   Til that to me be come the dethes tyde.          [3]


Best wishes, and happy poetry!

[1] I have a feeling /art/ here is the verb to be, and not
of art made by artists.  What do you think?

[2] Here, I suppose /wo/ is "woe" and not the sentence particle of
Japanese grammar.

[3] Is /dethes/ depths?  Where did the p come from?  Was that totally
made up to conform to some imaginary Latinian etymology?  Isn't that
what happened to "debt?"  Is "debt" a form of /determinants/ in linear
algebra?  That sounds stupid on the surface, but what is debt other than
the determination of someone else to get paid back?  And who determines
the determinants in linear algebra other than a loan shark?
-- 
Johann | email: invalid -> com | http://www.myrkraverk.com/blog/
I'm not from the Internet, I just work there. | via Easynews.com
https://bsky.app/profile/myrkraverk.bsky.social | for ( ;; ) _:;
Federated at https://fed.brid.gy/bsky/myrkraverk.bsky.social

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

#1151757 — Re: Chauserian Poetry

On 04/10/2026 04:53, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:

<snip>
> 
> Thinking about it a little further, I picked up a copy of Chauser in a
> library,
> 

"Chaucer"

>   https://archive.org/details/completeworksge00unkngoog/page/n35/mode/1up
> 
> and looking at that page we have
> 
>   Al hoolly youres, withouten otheres part!
>     Wherefore? y-wis, that I ne can ne may
>   My service chaungen; thus of al suche art        [1]
>     The lerninge I desyre for ever and ay.
>     And evermore, whyl that I live may,
>   In trouthe I wol your servant stille abyde,
>     Although my wo encrese day by day,             [2]
>   Til that to me be come the dethes tyde.          [3]
> 
> 
> Best wishes, and happy poetry!
> 
> [1] I have a feeling /art/ here is the verb to be, and not
> of art made by artists.  What do you think?
> 
> [2] Here, I suppose /wo/ is "woe" and not the sentence particle of
> Japanese grammar.
> 
> [3] Is /dethes/ depths?  Where did the p come from?  Was that totally
> made up to conform to some imaginary Latinian etymology?  Isn't that
> what happened to "debt?"  Is "debt" a form of /determinants/ in linear
> algebra?  That sounds stupid on the surface, but what is debt other than
> the determination of someone else to get paid back?  And who determines
> the determinants in linear algebra other than a loan shark?

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

#1151776 — Re: Chiuicerian Poetry

On 10/4/2026 3:07 PM, occam wrote:
> On 04/10/2026 04:53, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
> 
> <snip>
>>
>> Thinking about it a little further, I picked up a copy of Chauser in a
>> library,
>>
> 
> "Chaucer"

Really?  A speling correction?  Is that all you have to say on the mat-
ter?

Did you even try to read his own signature?  There's a bad copy on Wiki-
pedia, and I can only make out something like /chiuicer/.  So, how did
he spell his own name?


Best wishes, and happy name spelings!
-- 
Johann | email: invalid -> com | http://www.myrkraverk.com/blog/
I'm not from the Internet, I just work there. | via Easynews.com
https://bsky.app/profile/myrkraverk.bsky.social | for ( ;; ) _:;
Federated at https://fed.brid.gy/bsky/myrkraverk.bsky.social

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

#1151780 — Re: Chiuicerian Poetry

On 04/10/2026 13:18, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
> On 10/4/2026 3:07 PM, occam wrote:
>> On 04/10/2026 04:53, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>>
>>> Thinking about it a little further, I picked up a copy of Chauser in a
>>> library,
>>>
>>
>> "Chaucer"
> 
> Really?  A speling correction?  Is that all you have to say on the mat-
> ter?
> 

"spelling"

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

#1151752

On 04/10/26 13:41, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
>
> Thinking of /the proof is in the pudding/ for a context outside the
> scope of Usenet, I am now wondering how one would increase his or
> her knowledge of idioms, without having to know each and every one
> before hand?

The proof of the pudding is in the eating.

If you have heard "The proof of the pudding is in the pudding", that is
a distortion of the original saying.

-- 
Peter Moylan       peter@pmoylan.org    http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW

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

#1151753

On 10/4/2026 12:16 PM, Peter Moylan wrote:
> On 04/10/26 13:41, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
>>
>> Thinking of /the proof is in the pudding/ for a context outside the
>> scope of Usenet, I am now wondering how one would increase his or
>> her knowledge of idioms, without having to know each and every one
>> before hand?
> 
> The proof of the pudding is in the eating.
> 
> If you have heard "The proof of the pudding is in the pudding", that is
> a distortion of the original saying.
> 

Thank you.  I have merely been using -- or coming across it -- as
described by /The Idioms/ online,

   https://www.theidioms.com/the-proof-is-in-the-pudding/

where the eating is usually left out.  So it does seem the distortion is
now common.  I give the first example sentence,

   The team liked the proposal, but the proof is in the pudding once the
   product reaches customers.

and the second one has the eating part still intact, while the third one
does not.


Best wishes, and happy idioms!
-- 
Johann | email: invalid -> com | http://www.myrkraverk.com/blog/
I'm not from the Internet, I just work there. | via XS News
https://bsky.app/profile/myrkraverk.bsky.social | for ( ;; ) _:;
Federated at https://fed.brid.gy/bsky/myrkraverk.bsky.social

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

#1151764

Den 04.10.2026 kl. 04.41 skrev Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson:

> So, what do posters of alt.usage.english suggest?

Read books by English writers.

-- 
Bertel, Kolt, Danmark

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

#1151770

On 04/10/26 18:54, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
> Den 04.10.2026 kl. 04.41 skrev Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson:
>
>> So, what do posters of alt.usage.english suggest?
>
> Read books by English writers.

And be suspicious of what you read on the web.

-- 
Peter Moylan       peter@pmoylan.org    http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW

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

#1151772

On 10/4/2026 5:56 PM, Peter Moylan wrote:
> On 04/10/26 18:54, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
>> Den 04.10.2026 kl. 04.41 skrev Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson:
>>
>>> So, what do posters of alt.usage.english suggest?
>>
>> Read books by English writers.
> 
> And be suspicious of what you read on the web.
> 

And books.  Though I don't have a read made example of an error in a
book with an English author.

I can point to my cheque from Knuth -- though it doesn't say -- as an
example even he has code errors from time to time [not a TeX cheque
though; just /Digital Typography/ (1st ed.)].

Manuscripts -- especially those either from before the time of printing
or never meant as books -- famously have errors.


Best wishes, and happy spotting errors in edited and published books!
-- 
Johann | email: invalid -> com | http://www.myrkraverk.com/blog/
I'm not from the Internet, I just work there. | via Easynews.com
https://bsky.app/profile/myrkraverk.bsky.social | for ( ;; ) _:;
Federated at https://fed.brid.gy/bsky/myrkraverk.bsky.social

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

#1151777

Den 04.10.2026 kl. 12.56 skrev Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson:

>>>> So, what do posters of alt.usage.english suggest?
>>>
>>> Read books by English writers.
>>
>> And be suspicious of what you read on the web.
>>
> 
> And books.  Though I don't have a read made example of an error in a
> book with an English author.

If you just want to pick up idiomatic expressions, you don't have to 
worry about spelling errors.

-- 
Bertel, Kolt, Danmark

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

#1151801 — Re: The proof is in the pudding, or where to get physical dictionaries of idioms?

Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
> 
> Den 04.10.2026 kl. 12.56 skrev Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson:
> 
> >>>> So, what do posters of alt.usage.english suggest?
> >>>
> >>> Read books by English writers.
> >>
> >> And be suspicious of what you read on the web.
> >>
> >
> > And books.  Though I don't have a read made example of an error in a
> > book with an English author.
> 
> If you just want to pick up idiomatic expressions, you don't have to
> worry about spelling errors.

This is actually coming from a alt.usage.english newsgroup!!!


Fack It!


> 
> --
> Bertel, Kolt, Danmark

-- 
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, 
and challenge the unchallengeable.

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

#1151819

On 04/10/26 21:56, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
> On 10/4/2026 5:56 PM, Peter Moylan wrote:
>> On 04/10/26 18:54, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
>>> Den 04.10.2026 kl. 04.41 skrev Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson:
>>>
>>>> So, what do posters of alt.usage.english suggest?
>>>
>>> Read books by English writers.
>>
>> And be suspicious of what you read on the web.
>
> And books.  Though I don't have a read made example of an error in a
> book with an English author.

The difference is that books have been checked by an editor.

> I can point to my cheque from Knuth -- though it doesn't say -- as
> an example even he has code errors from time to time [not a TeX
> cheque though; just /Digital Typography/ (1st ed.)].
>
> Manuscripts -- especially those either from before the time of
> printing or never meant as books -- famously have errors.

But at what frequency? The error rate in edited materials is quite low.
You would not find "the proof is in the pudding" in an edited novel.
The web, on the other hand, is notoriously filled with misinformation.

-- 
Peter Moylan       peter@pmoylan.org    http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW

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

#1151803

Peter Moylan wrote:
> 
> On 04/10/26 18:54, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
> > Den 04.10.2026 kl. 04.41 skrev Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson:
> >
> >> So, what do posters of alt.usage.english suggest?
> >
> > Read books by English writers.
> 
> And be suspicious of what you read on the web.


Is that an idiom???? An English catch phrase?


Sounds like grandma talk to me...


"And be suspicious of what you read on the web."


PUT DAT IN THE BOOK!!! 





> 
> --
> Peter Moylan       peter@pmoylan.org    http://www.pmoylan.org
> Newcastle, NSW

-- 
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, 
and challenge the unchallengeable.

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

#1151804

On 04/10/2026 10:56, Peter Moylan wrote:
> On 04/10/26 18:54, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
>> Den 04.10.2026 kl. 04.41 skrev Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson:
>>
>>> So, what do posters of alt.usage.english suggest?
>>
>> Read books by English writers.
> 
> And be suspicious of what you read on the web.
> 
Indeed.
Given the one example quoted, that web site should not be tossed aside 
lightly. It should be thrown with great force.

-- 
Sam Plusnet

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

#1151773

On 10/4/2026 3:54 PM, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
> Den 04.10.2026 kl. 04.41 skrev Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson:
> 
>> So, what do posters of alt.usage.english suggest?
> 
> Read books by English writers.
> 

I tentatively have

   /Webster's New World: American Idioms Handbook/,

   /Oxford Dictionary of Idioms (Oxford Quick Reference),

   /The Penguin Dictionary of English Idioms (4,000+ Idioms)
    (Penguin Reference Books)/,

   /The Great Book of American Idioms: A Dictionary of American Idioms,
    Sayings, Expressions & Phrases/,

on my list of future tsundoku.  Do you have a better and more English
reference in mind?
-- 
Johann | email: invalid -> com | http://www.myrkraverk.com/blog/
I'm not from the Internet, I just work there. | via Easynews.com
https://bsky.app/profile/myrkraverk.bsky.social | for ( ;; ) _:;
Federated at https://fed.brid.gy/bsky/myrkraverk.bsky.social

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

#1151775

Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> wrote or quoted:
>on my list of future tsundoku.  Do you have a better and more English
>reference in mind?

  I once rated as

good           "English Idioms and How To Use Them" by Seidl/McMordie 
average        "A Dictionary of Confusable Phrases" by Yuri Dolgopolov
below average  "Collins Cobuild Dictionary of Idioms" by John Sinclair

  , but this was a while ago, so I can't explain today how these
  rates came about.

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

#1151778

Den 04.10.2026 kl. 12.59 skrev Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson:

> on my list of future tsundoku.  Do you have a better and more English
> reference in mind?

Yes, books by Conan Doyle, Dorothy L. Sayers, Mark Twain, Robert 
Heinlein, Stephen R. Donaldson, J.R.R. Tolkien and many more.

(Random sequence - except the first)

-- 
Bertel, Kolt, Danmark

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

#1151774

Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> wrote or quoted:
>I know books of idioms have been published in Iceland, but as far as I'm
>aware, nobody has suggested one for English.

  There are many dictionaries of idioms for English out there,
  and I guess many of them also available in paper form. It should
  be possible to find them by searching for [idioms dictionary] in
  an online bookstore or search engine. You also could walk to a 
  special English bookstore or library in Iceland or the library
  of a university. Or, next time you are in England, see a book-
  store there.

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

#1151789

El Sun, 04 Oct 2026 10:41:57 +0800, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson
escribió:

> Maybe I'll pick up Chauserian English one of these days, but not today.
> Today I thought to pick up a few more unknown-to-me idioms and express-
> ions of more recent usage.
> 
> 
> So, what do posters of alt.usage.english suggest?


Irrelevant (my middle name), but as ever, in Spanish we have free 
resources:

https://www.ucm.es/plataformaele/dichos-y-frases-hechas

There are many more.

-- 
Paul.

https://paulc.es
 

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

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

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

csiph-web