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

Groups > misc.writing > #23211 > unrolled thread

Re: 15 million fools

Back to article view | Back to misc.writing

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: 15 million fools Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net> - 2015-12-30 22:19 -0500
    Re: 15 million fools James Hogg <Jas.Hogg@gOUTmail.com> - 2015-12-31 09:22 +0100
      Re: 15 million fools "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> - 2015-12-31 17:12 +0000
        Re: 15 million fools Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net> - 2015-12-31 22:00 -0500
          Re: 15 million fools Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> - 2016-01-01 17:47 +1100
            Re: 15 million fools musika <mUs1Ka@NOSPAMexcite.com> - 2016-01-01 08:16 +0000
              Re: 15 million fools Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> - 2016-01-01 19:30 +1100
            Re: 15 million fools "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> - 2016-01-01 14:58 +0000
              Re: 15 million fools Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net> - 2016-01-01 21:52 -0500
                Re: 15 million fools "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> - 2016-01-02 20:42 +0000
                  Re: 15 million fools Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net> - 2016-01-02 21:54 -0500
                    Re: 15 million fools "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> - 2016-01-03 16:09 +0000
            Re: 15 million fools Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net> - 2016-01-01 21:47 -0500
              Re: 15 million fools "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> - 2016-01-02 20:42 +0000
          Re: 15 million fools "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> - 2016-01-01 14:57 +0000
            Re: 15 million fools Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net> - 2016-01-01 21:54 -0500
              Re: 15 million fools "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> - 2016-01-02 20:44 +0000
                Re: 15 million fools Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net> - 2016-01-02 21:55 -0500
                  Re: 15 million fools "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> - 2016-01-03 16:10 +0000
                    Re: 15 million fools Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net> - 2016-01-03 17:32 -0500
                      Re: 15 million fools "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> - 2016-01-04 00:25 +0000
                        Re: 15 million fools Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net> - 2016-01-04 11:56 -0500
                          Re: 15 million fools "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> - 2016-01-04 17:21 +0000
                            Re: 15 million fools Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net> - 2016-01-04 17:44 -0500
                              Re: 15 million fools "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> - 2016-01-04 23:38 +0000
                                Re: 15 million fools Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net> - 2016-01-04 23:12 -0500
                                  Re: 15 million fools "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> - 2016-01-05 22:16 +0000
                                    Re: 15 million fools Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net> - 2016-01-05 22:04 -0500
                                      Re: 15 million fools "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> - 2016-01-06 20:09 +0000
    Re: 15 million fools "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> - 2015-12-31 17:11 +0000
      Re: 15 million fools Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net> - 2015-12-31 22:36 -0500
        Re: 15 million fools Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> - 2016-01-01 18:12 +1100
          Re: 15 million fools Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net> - 2016-01-01 22:17 -0500
        Re: 15 million fools "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> - 2016-01-01 11:00 +0000
          Re: 15 million fools GordonD <g.davie@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-01 19:46 +0000
            Re: 15 million fools "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> - 2016-01-01 19:54 +0000
          Re: 15 million fools Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net> - 2016-01-01 22:41 -0500
            Re: 15 million fools "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> - 2016-01-02 20:46 +0000
              Re: 15 million fools Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net> - 2016-01-02 21:52 -0500
                Re: 15 million fools RH Draney <dadoctah@cox.net> - 2016-01-02 22:03 -0700
                Re: 15 million fools Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> - 2016-01-03 17:34 +1100
                Re: 15 million fools Janet <nobody@home.org> - 2016-01-03 11:31 +0000
                  Re: 15 million fools Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net> - 2016-01-03 17:40 -0500
                    Re: 15 million fools Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> - 2016-01-04 10:13 +1100
                      Re: 15 million fools Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net> - 2016-01-05 16:43 -0500
                        Re: 15 million fools Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> - 2016-01-05 17:36 -0500
                Re: 15 million fools "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> - 2016-01-03 18:36 +0000
                  Re: 15 million fools Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net> - 2016-01-03 17:54 -0500
                    Re: 15 million fools "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> - 2016-01-04 00:27 +0000
                      Re: 15 million fools Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net> - 2016-01-04 17:58 -0500
                        Re: 15 million fools "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> - 2016-01-04 23:40 +0000
              Re: 15 million fools GordonD <g.davie@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-04 09:06 +0000
                Re: 15 million fools "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> - 2016-01-04 19:15 +0000
        Re: 15 million fools Charles Bishop <ctbishop@earthlink.net> - 2016-01-02 17:29 -0800
          Re: 15 million fools "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> - 2016-01-03 16:09 +0000

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

#23241

On 2016-Jan-03 13:52, Mr. B1ack wrote:

>    There's a reason irregular verbs are called "irregular". 
>    Conventions, homegrown or imported, that just stuck,
>    likely because somebody important used them. They
>    do not follow from any "rule". 

They're more regular than you think. Try looking up "strong verb".

"Conventions that just stuck" is a better description of the way many
strong verbs have been altered by applying the weak verb paradigm.

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

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

#23242

In article <0t1h8bdcs6gjq6dlggpk52e9cdph97746f@4ax.com>, 
nowhere@nada.net says...

>    Hmm ... is there "Hindglish" - Hindi-English - in the UK ? Lots
>    of immigrants from there, held partially segregated for 
>    racial & class reasons for over 100 years ....
 bound to be
>    some interesting words and grammar ......

     Lots of words, not just brought by the immigrants. 
 
     Civil Service staff from Britain ran and administered the British 
Empire in India.For many of them, learning Hindi, Urdu or various other 
native languages was an essential requirement of the job. Their wives 
also learned at least some so that they could communicate with their 
domestic servants.
So, long before large immigrations from the subcontinent to UK, many 
words from their languages had been acquired and brought back by Brits 
and so completely absorbed into Br E  everyone uses them. Examples

  https://www.quora.com/What-are-some-Hindi-Sanskrit-Urdu-words-
borrowed-by-the-English-language


   Janet.

 

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

#23248

On Sun, 3 Jan 2016 11:31:52 -0000, Janet <nobody@home.org> wrote:

>In article <0t1h8bdcs6gjq6dlggpk52e9cdph97746f@4ax.com>, 
>nowhere@nada.net says...
>
>>    Hmm ... is there "Hindglish" - Hindi-English - in the UK ? Lots
>>    of immigrants from there, held partially segregated for 
>>    racial & class reasons for over 100 years ....
> bound to be
>>    some interesting words and grammar ......
>
>     Lots of words, not just brought by the immigrants. 
> 
>     Civil Service staff from Britain ran and administered the British 
>Empire in India.For many of them, learning Hindi, Urdu or various other 
>native languages was an essential requirement of the job. Their wives 
>also learned at least some so that they could communicate with their 
>domestic servants.
>So, long before large immigrations from the subcontinent to UK, many 
>words from their languages had been acquired and brought back by Brits 
>and so completely absorbed into Br E  everyone uses them. Examples
>
>  https://www.quora.com/What-are-some-Hindi-Sanskrit-Urdu-words-
>borrowed-by-the-English-language


   The conqueror becomes the conquered ?  :-)

   Oh ... you seem well informed ... there's a Britishism
   that eludes me - saying somebody is "in hospital" rather
   than "in the hospital" or "in a hospital". Americans DO
   say "in prison" however ... 

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

#23250

On 2016-Jan-04 09:40, Mr. B1ack wrote:

>    Oh ... you seem well informed ... there's a Britishism
>    that eludes me - saying somebody is "in hospital" rather
>    than "in the hospital" or "in a hospital". Americans DO
>    say "in prison" however ... 

Also "in college", "at home", and many other examples. This has been
discussed numerous times in this newsgroup, so it's probably in the AUE
FAQ. In non-American English, "in hospital" means that the person is a
patient, while "in the hospital" means at some specific hospital, not
necessarily as a patient. "Dr X is not in the hospital right now. Have
you tried phoning his practice?"

The general rule is that "in the X" is a reference to a specific X,
while "in X" is referring not to a place but to a state. If I say "My
nephew is at university" I mean that he is a student, but not
necessarily on campus right now. (And I haven't specified which
university.) If instead I say he is "at the university" I mean that he
is physically on the campus (and the definite article implies that we're
talking about one specific university, whose identity is established by
context), but he is not necessarily a student. He might, for example, be
a plumber who is there doing a repair.

American English also makes this distinction. OK, you say "college"
rather than "university", but that's a minor detail. In all cases the
use of the definite article means that we are speaking of a named
prison, college, hospital, university, etc., which the lack of the
definite article means that we are speaking of a state. "In prison" just
means "imprisoned", without saying where.

There's just one exception. For some reason AmE breaks this rule in the
case of "hospital".

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

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

#23264

On Mon, 04 Jan 2016 10:13:02 +1100, Peter Moylan
<peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:

>On 2016-Jan-04 09:40, Mr. B1ack wrote:
>
>>    Oh ... you seem well informed ... there's a Britishism
>>    that eludes me - saying somebody is "in hospital" rather
>>    than "in the hospital" or "in a hospital". Americans DO
>>    say "in prison" however ... 
>
>Also "in college", "at home", and many other examples. This has been
>discussed numerous times in this newsgroup, so it's probably in the AUE
>FAQ. In non-American English, "in hospital" means that the person is a
>patient, while "in the hospital" means at some specific hospital, not
>necessarily as a patient. "Dr X is not in the hospital right now. Have
>you tried phoning his practice?"

   To discriminate between a patient and somebody
   who just happens to be within a hospital we say "IN
   the hospital" for a patient and "AT the hospital"
   for non-patients. 

   "Mr. Jones is in the hospital".

   "Mrs Jones is visiting her husband at the hospital".

   Anyone "in" is presumed to be ill. There's a slight
   problem with all this if Mr. Jones is a hospital
   administrator or functionary and Mrs. Jones has
   stopped by to discuss the party they're having
   that weekend ...... you need personal knowledge
   of Mr. Jones to decode the sentences. 

>The general rule is that "in the X" is a reference to a specific X,
>while "in X" is referring not to a place but to a state. If I say "My
>nephew is at university" I mean that he is a student, but not
>necessarily on campus right now. (And I haven't specified which
>university.) If instead I say he is "at the university" I mean that he
>is physically on the campus (and the definite article implies that we're
>talking about one specific university, whose identity is established by
>context), but he is not necessarily a student. He might, for example, be
>a plumber who is there doing a repair.
>
>American English also makes this distinction. OK, you say "college"
>rather than "university", but that's a minor detail. In all cases the
>use of the definite article means that we are speaking of a named
>prison, college, hospital, university, etc., which the lack of the
>definite article means that we are speaking of a state. "In prison" just
>means "imprisoned", without saying where.

>There's just one exception. For some reason AmE breaks this rule in the
>case of "hospital".

   Just doesn't sound right to say "in hospital" ... has
   to be a "the" or "at" involved somewhere or the
   American ear becomes inflamed. Not sure exactly
   when where or why that convention appeared but
   at this point it's deeply entrenched, a standard
   phrase. 

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

#23266

On Tue, 05 Jan 2016 16:43:29 -0500, Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net>
wrote:

>On Mon, 04 Jan 2016 10:13:02 +1100, Peter Moylan
><peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
>
>>On 2016-Jan-04 09:40, Mr. B1ack wrote:
>>
>>>    Oh ... you seem well informed ... there's a Britishism
>>>    that eludes me - saying somebody is "in hospital" rather
>>>    than "in the hospital" or "in a hospital". Americans DO
>>>    say "in prison" however ... 
>>
>>Also "in college", "at home", and many other examples. This has been
>>discussed numerous times in this newsgroup, so it's probably in the AUE
>>FAQ. In non-American English, "in hospital" means that the person is a
>>patient, while "in the hospital" means at some specific hospital, not
>>necessarily as a patient. "Dr X is not in the hospital right now. Have
>>you tried phoning his practice?"
>
>   To discriminate between a patient and somebody
>   who just happens to be within a hospital we say "IN
>   the hospital" for a patient and "AT the hospital"
>   for non-patients. 
>
>   "Mr. Jones is in the hospital".
>
>   "Mrs Jones is visiting her husband at the hospital".

Not necessarily.  The second sentence kinda indicates that the meeting
took place in the hospital, but doesn't clearly indicate the Mr Jones
is a patient.  And, I don't see a problem with "in" in both.
>
>   Anyone "in" is presumed to be ill. There's a slight
>   problem with all this if Mr. Jones is a hospital
>   administrator or functionary and Mrs. Jones has
>   stopped by to discuss the party they're having
>   that weekend ...... you need personal knowledge
>   of Mr. Jones to decode the sentences. 
>
-- 
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

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

#23246

On Sun, 03 Jan 2016 02:52:37 -0000, Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net> wrote:

> On Sat, 02 Jan 2016 20:46:25 -0000, "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 02 Jan 2016 03:41:41 -0000, Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 01 Jan 2016 11:00:40 -0000, "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 01 Jan 2016 03:36:45 -0000, Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, 31 Dec 2015 17:11:41 -0000, "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>
>>>>>> I've never heard anyone say "runned".  I've also never heard anyone
>>>>>
>>>>>    I hear it more and more - and from more 'educated' people - as
>>>>>    time goes on. It's "Blinglish' ... American "Black English", a sort
>>>>>    of pigin where non-speakers learned a language quickly and
>>>>>    skipped the more subtle rules. That which did happen often has
>>>>>    "-ed" at the end, so "run"/"runned", "sit"/"sitted" ... the simple
>>>>>    rule applied to everything. Mass exposure then leads to mass
>>>>>    usage.
>>>>
>>>> From someone who doesn't speak much English, someone here on
>>>> holiday maybe, but I don't expect it from anyone who speaks English
>>>> everyday.
>>>
>>>    The internet does have the ability to educate - it's not ALL porn.
>>>
>>>    So find on-the-street news coverage, say of the "Black Lives
>>>    Matter" demonstrations. Street interviews will reveal the local
>>>    lingo - and it is as I've said. The professional newscasters try
>>>    to keep it more formal, but even they might say "runned" or
>>>    "hitted" or "shooted" if they are "live" and do not have time
>>>    to mentally edit their speech.
>>
>> Ah, blacks.
>
>
>    There are also pidgins amongst the "Spanish" subcultures
>    (Mexican isn't Guatamalan isn't Cuban isn't Puerto Rican)
>    and the longer-established asian enclaves. 'Cajun'/Acadian
>    "Fringlish" permeates much of the state of Louisiana as well.
>    The sheer size of the USA allowed immigrants from many
>    nations to form partial enclaves where the Queens english
>    mixed with the local lingo in odd and interesting ways.
>   Hmm ... is there "Hindglish" - Hindi-English - in the UK ? Lots
>    of immigrants from there, held partially segregated for
>    racial & class reasons for over 100 years .... bound to be
>    some interesting words and grammar ......

Hindis here speak very clearly and use proper English, but leave no spaces between the words.  Easy to understand if you can prevent yourself from laughing.

>>>>>> say "pled" if that's even a word.  What would you say instead of pleaded?
>>>>>
>>>>>    "Mr. Fracas was brought before a judge and pled 'not guilty'
>>>>>    to the charges ..... "
>>>>>
>>>>>    In 1960s America that would have been the most common way
>>>>>    of stating that in the news. Today it's "pleaded".
>>>>
>>>> If someone said pled now I'd fall about laughing.  In fact my newsreader has underlined it in red.
>>>>
>>>>>> A word that annoys me is "dove".  Not dove the bird, but dove as in past tense if dive, pronounced like cove.
>>>>>
>>>>>    You want "dived" ?
>>>>>
>>>>>    "Dove" is another irregular verb ... that's going away.
>>>>>
>>>>>    But if you want to sound smart you say "dove"  :-)
>>>>>
>>>>>    50 years from now however, will anybody even understand
>>>>>    if you say "dove" ? It may be like the language of the Bard,
>>>>>    pretty but obsolete. Can you really appreciate Hamlet if
>>>>>    you cannot follow the meter and rhythm and play of his
>>>>>    obsolete words ??? Those were far richer plays to even
>>>>>    the common folk of his day than they are to the educated
>>>>>    class of today.
>>>>
>>>> Isn't dove an Americanism like aluminum?
>>>
>>>    I am unaware of its full extent. I've definitely heard the
>>>    word on BBC television - news and entertainment - so
>>>    "dove" has made it back to the motherland.
>>
>> The BBC is no longer what it once was.
>
>    Maybe ... but it's still a cut above any American news/culture
>    programming. Americans have a very short attention span
>    and despise "egghead" discussions. A practical, blue-collar,
>    black & white novelty-loving culture. Car crashes, police
>    chases and  "Funniest Home Videos" reign supreme.

:-)

>    Ah ... an episode of "Dr. Who" sometime last year ... the MI-6
>    lady tells another why they've kept a time-travel device secret
>    from the Americans ... "Well, you've seen their movies !"  :-)
>
>>>    It will surely filter down to all speakers from there. Frankly
>>>    I think it sounds more educated than "dived" and is
>>>    more specific than "jumped".
>>
>> Would you say jove for the past tense of jive?  Love for the past tense of live?
>
>    There's a reason irregular verbs are called "irregular".
>    Conventions, homegrown or imported, that just stuck,
>    likely because somebody important used them. They
>    do not follow from any "rule".

Some just sound silly and should not be used under any circumstances :-)

>>>    "Aluminum" isn't an Americanism per-se .... the
>>>    PRONUNCIATION is. Americans say "Ah-LOOM-
>>>    uh-num" while Brits (and surely those in Oz and
>>>    NZ) say "Al-You-MIN-ee-um". The latter really
>>>    does seem to sound better with a "British accent".
>>>    From the spelling, the British form also seems
>>>    more correct. Sharp/crisp-sounding words do
>>>    tend to "soften" with time and distance ... become
>>>    more "vowely".
>>
>> The spell it different aswell as pronounce it different.
>
>    "Colour" -vs- "color" ? Americans are lazy too, we tend
>    to drop "useless" letters  :-)

You're not lazy when it comes to eating!

-- 
My sister-in-law sat on my glasses and broke them.  It was my own fault.  I should have taken them off.

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

#23249

On Sun, 03 Jan 2016 18:36:22 -0000, "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> wrote:

>On Sun, 03 Jan 2016 02:52:37 -0000, Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 02 Jan 2016 20:46:25 -0000, "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, 02 Jan 2016 03:41:41 -0000, Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 01 Jan 2016 11:00:40 -0000, "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 01 Jan 2016 03:36:45 -0000, Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, 31 Dec 2015 17:11:41 -0000, "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> I've never heard anyone say "runned".  I've also never heard anyone
>>>>>>
>>>>>>    I hear it more and more - and from more 'educated' people - as
>>>>>>    time goes on. It's "Blinglish' ... American "Black English", a sort
>>>>>>    of pigin where non-speakers learned a language quickly and
>>>>>>    skipped the more subtle rules. That which did happen often has
>>>>>>    "-ed" at the end, so "run"/"runned", "sit"/"sitted" ... the simple
>>>>>>    rule applied to everything. Mass exposure then leads to mass
>>>>>>    usage.
>>>>>
>>>>> From someone who doesn't speak much English, someone here on
>>>>> holiday maybe, but I don't expect it from anyone who speaks English
>>>>> everyday.
>>>>
>>>>    The internet does have the ability to educate - it's not ALL porn.
>>>>
>>>>    So find on-the-street news coverage, say of the "Black Lives
>>>>    Matter" demonstrations. Street interviews will reveal the local
>>>>    lingo - and it is as I've said. The professional newscasters try
>>>>    to keep it more formal, but even they might say "runned" or
>>>>    "hitted" or "shooted" if they are "live" and do not have time
>>>>    to mentally edit their speech.
>>>
>>> Ah, blacks.
>>
>>
>>    There are also pidgins amongst the "Spanish" subcultures
>>    (Mexican isn't Guatamalan isn't Cuban isn't Puerto Rican)
>>    and the longer-established asian enclaves. 'Cajun'/Acadian
>>    "Fringlish" permeates much of the state of Louisiana as well.
>>    The sheer size of the USA allowed immigrants from many
>>    nations to form partial enclaves where the Queens english
>>    mixed with the local lingo in odd and interesting ways.
>>   Hmm ... is there "Hindglish" - Hindi-English - in the UK ? Lots
>>    of immigrants from there, held partially segregated for
>>    racial & class reasons for over 100 years .... bound to be
>>    some interesting words and grammar ......
>
>Hindis here speak very clearly and use proper English, but leave no
>spaces between the words.  Easy to understand if you can prevent
>yourself from laughing.

   They run practically every "convenience store" in America
   at this point, so we're well-exposed  :-) 

   They seem to replace the 'gaps' with harder letter sounds,
   "WeMustNowGoToTheMeeting" - at least to my ear. This,
   combined with their native accents, can make it rather
   difficult to understand them at times. Now if you want funny,
   find a store clerk that has been living in our deep south 
   for a long time ... Hindglish with a slow drawl  :-) 

>>
>>    "Colour" -vs- "color" ? Americans are lazy too, we tend
>>    to drop "useless" letters  :-)
>
>You're not lazy when it comes to eating!

   We're hardly the only 'pudgy' country in
   the world. 

   To some extent I think our culinary habits
   are a reflection of the "great depression"
   of the 1930s. There were a lot of skinny
   kids then ... and not skinny by choice. 
   Once the food returned I think they started
   making up for lost calories - 'fat' meant
   'healthy', 'happy' and to some degree 'wealthy'. 

   There are also our not-THAT distant colonial
   roots where people expended vast amounts
   of energy in hard labor in rugged environments.
   A 6000 kCal dinner wasn't actually excessive.
   The recipies and traditions stuck ... even after
   life became easier.    

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

#23252

On Sun, 03 Jan 2016 22:54:51 -0000, Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net> wrote:

> On Sun, 03 Jan 2016 18:36:22 -0000, "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 03 Jan 2016 02:52:37 -0000, Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, 02 Jan 2016 20:46:25 -0000, "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 02 Jan 2016 03:41:41 -0000, Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 01 Jan 2016 11:00:40 -0000, "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, 01 Jan 2016 03:36:45 -0000, Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, 31 Dec 2015 17:11:41 -0000, "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I've never heard anyone say "runned".  I've also never heard anyone
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>    I hear it more and more - and from more 'educated' people - as
>>>>>>>    time goes on. It's "Blinglish' ... American "Black English", a sort
>>>>>>>    of pigin where non-speakers learned a language quickly and
>>>>>>>    skipped the more subtle rules. That which did happen often has
>>>>>>>    "-ed" at the end, so "run"/"runned", "sit"/"sitted" ... the simple
>>>>>>>    rule applied to everything. Mass exposure then leads to mass
>>>>>>>    usage.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> From someone who doesn't speak much English, someone here on
>>>>>> holiday maybe, but I don't expect it from anyone who speaks English
>>>>>> everyday.
>>>>>
>>>>>    The internet does have the ability to educate - it's not ALL porn.
>>>>>
>>>>>    So find on-the-street news coverage, say of the "Black Lives
>>>>>    Matter" demonstrations. Street interviews will reveal the local
>>>>>    lingo - and it is as I've said. The professional newscasters try
>>>>>    to keep it more formal, but even they might say "runned" or
>>>>>    "hitted" or "shooted" if they are "live" and do not have time
>>>>>    to mentally edit their speech.
>>>>
>>>> Ah, blacks.
>>>
>>>
>>>    There are also pidgins amongst the "Spanish" subcultures
>>>    (Mexican isn't Guatamalan isn't Cuban isn't Puerto Rican)
>>>    and the longer-established asian enclaves. 'Cajun'/Acadian
>>>    "Fringlish" permeates much of the state of Louisiana as well.
>>>    The sheer size of the USA allowed immigrants from many
>>>    nations to form partial enclaves where the Queens english
>>>    mixed with the local lingo in odd and interesting ways.
>>>   Hmm ... is there "Hindglish" - Hindi-English - in the UK ? Lots
>>>    of immigrants from there, held partially segregated for
>>>    racial & class reasons for over 100 years .... bound to be
>>>    some interesting words and grammar ......
>>
>> Hindis here speak very clearly and use proper English, but leave no
>> spaces between the words.  Easy to understand if you can prevent
>> yourself from laughing.
>
>    They run practically every "convenience store" in America
>    at this point, so we're well-exposed  :-)

Same here.  When possible I avoid those ones.

>    They seem to replace the 'gaps' with harder letter sounds,
>    "WeMustNowGoToTheMeeting" - at least to my ear. This,
>    combined with their native accents, can make it rather
>    difficult to understand them at times.

I have no problem understanding them, in fact those harder sounds make the words clearer.

>    Now if you want funny,
>    find a store clerk that has been living in our deep south
>    for a long time ... Hindglish with a slow drawl  :-)

Deep South accents just make people sound stupid.

>>>    "Colour" -vs- "color" ? Americans are lazy too, we tend
>>>    to drop "useless" letters  :-)
>>
>> You're not lazy when it comes to eating!
>
>    We're hardly the only 'pudgy' country in
>    the world.

You're the country famous for it.

>    To some extent I think our culinary habits
>    are a reflection of the "great depression"
>    of the 1930s. There were a lot of skinny
>    kids then ... and not skinny by choice.
>    Once the food returned I think they started
>    making up for lost calories - 'fat' meant
>    'healthy', 'happy' and to some degree 'wealthy'.
>
>    There are also our not-THAT distant colonial
>    roots where people expended vast amounts
>    of energy in hard labor in rugged environments.
>    A 6000 kCal dinner wasn't actually excessive.
>    The recipies and traditions stuck ... even after
>    life became easier.

Look up ectomorph.  Now explain to me why they don't supersede everyone else.  When you choose your spouse, if an ectomorph is available, you'd obviously pick one.

-- 
An English woman who has been blind for 26 years got her sight back after suffering a heart attack.
Unfortunately, after she was able to see her doctors bill she had several more heart attacks.

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

#23258

On Mon, 04 Jan 2016 00:27:40 -0000, "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> wrote:

>On Sun, 03 Jan 2016 22:54:51 -0000, Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>>> Hindis here speak very clearly and use proper English, but leave no
>>> spaces between the words.  Easy to understand if you can prevent
>>> yourself from laughing.
>>
>>    They run practically every "convenience store" in America
>>    at this point, so we're well-exposed  :-)
>
>Same here.  When possible I avoid those ones.


   Aww ... SOME aren't so bad ....... just make
   sure to check the "Best If Sold By" dates on
   whatever you purchase  :-) 


>>    They seem to replace the 'gaps' with harder letter sounds,
>>    "WeMustNowGoToTheMeeting" - at least to my ear. This,
>>    combined with their native accents, can make it rather
>>    difficult to understand them at times.
>
>I have no problem understanding them, in fact those harder sounds make the words clearer.

   Not to my ear ... though likely with more exposure
   I could follow the cadence and rythm better. 

>>    Now if you want funny,
>>    find a store clerk that has been living in our deep south
>>    for a long time ... Hindglish with a slow drawl  :-)
>
>Deep South accents just make people sound stupid.

   That's just to throw you off guard ... with every
   smoothly drawn-out syllable they're plotting ways
   to defile your teenaged daughters  :-) 

>>>>    "Colour" -vs- "color" ? Americans are lazy too, we tend
>>>>    to drop "useless" letters  :-)
>>>
>>> You're not lazy when it comes to eating!
>>
>>    We're hardly the only 'pudgy' country in
>>    the world.
>
>You're the country famous for it.


   Greater volume of exported news/cultural
   media than anywhere else ... 


>>    To some extent I think our culinary habits
>>    are a reflection of the "great depression"
>>    of the 1930s. There were a lot of skinny
>>    kids then ... and not skinny by choice.
>>    Once the food returned I think they started
>>    making up for lost calories - 'fat' meant
>>    'healthy', 'happy' and to some degree 'wealthy'.
>>
>>    There are also our not-THAT distant colonial
>>    roots where people expended vast amounts
>>    of energy in hard labor in rugged environments.
>>    A 6000 kCal dinner wasn't actually excessive.
>>    The recipies and traditions stuck ... even after
>>    life became easier.
>
>Look up ectomorph.  Now explain to me why they
>don't supersede everyone else.

   Too fat for the desert and too skinny for Alaska ? 

>When you choose your spouse, if an ectomorph is
>available, you'd obviously pick one.

   Careful ... a lot of them inflate into huge pinatas 
   30 days after you say "I Do". Always check the
   family photos   :-) 

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

#23260

On Mon, 04 Jan 2016 22:58:36 -0000, Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net> wrote:

> On Mon, 04 Jan 2016 00:27:40 -0000, "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 03 Jan 2016 22:54:51 -0000, Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net> wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>>> Hindis here speak very clearly and use proper English, but leave no
>>>> spaces between the words.  Easy to understand if you can prevent
>>>> yourself from laughing.
>>>
>>>    They run practically every "convenience store" in America
>>>    at this point, so we're well-exposed  :-)
>>
>> Same here.  When possible I avoid those ones.
>
>
>    Aww ... SOME aren't so bad ....... just make
>    sure to check the "Best If Sold By" dates on
>    whatever you purchase  :-)

It s the folk I don't like, not the food.  Although they do tend to fail cleanliness checks.

>>>    They seem to replace the 'gaps' with harder letter sounds,
>>>    "WeMustNowGoToTheMeeting" - at least to my ear. This,
>>>    combined with their native accents, can make it rather
>>>    difficult to understand them at times.
>>
>> I have no problem understanding them, in fact those harder sounds make the words clearer.
>
>    Not to my ear ... though likely with more exposure
>    I could follow the cadence and rythm better.

The consonants are stronger, so easier to hear.  Like the opposite of a drunk slurring his words.

>>>    Now if you want funny,
>>>    find a store clerk that has been living in our deep south
>>>    for a long time ... Hindglish with a slow drawl  :-)
>>
>> Deep South accents just make people sound stupid.
>
>    That's just to throw you off guard ... with every
>    smoothly drawn-out syllable they're plotting ways
>    to defile your teenaged daughters  :-)

Doesn't need much intelligence to do that, just a big cock or a fancy car.

>>>>>    "Colour" -vs- "color" ? Americans are lazy too, we tend
>>>>>    to drop "useless" letters  :-)
>>>>
>>>> You're not lazy when it comes to eating!
>>>
>>>    We're hardly the only 'pudgy' country in
>>>    the world.
>>
>> You're the country famous for it.
>
>    Greater volume of exported news/cultural
>    media than anywhere else ...

Pah!  Go find stats that prove otherwise.

>>>    To some extent I think our culinary habits
>>>    are a reflection of the "great depression"
>>>    of the 1930s. There were a lot of skinny
>>>    kids then ... and not skinny by choice.
>>>    Once the food returned I think they started
>>>    making up for lost calories - 'fat' meant
>>>    'healthy', 'happy' and to some degree 'wealthy'.
>>>
>>>    There are also our not-THAT distant colonial
>>>    roots where people expended vast amounts
>>>    of energy in hard labor in rugged environments.
>>>    A 6000 kCal dinner wasn't actually excessive.
>>>    The recipies and traditions stuck ... even after
>>>    life became easier.
>>
>> Look up ectomorph.  Now explain to me why they
>> don't supersede everyone else.
>
>    Too fat for the desert and too skinny for Alaska ?

Huh?

>> When you choose your spouse, if an ectomorph is
>> available, you'd obviously pick one.
>
>    Careful ... a lot of them inflate into huge pinatas
>    30 days after you say "I Do". Always check the
>    family photos   :-)

Rubbish.  Ectomorphs are easy to spot.

-- 
What's the difference between a black and a white fairytale?
White begins, "once upon a time," black begins, "y'all motherfuckers ain't gonna believe dis shit!"

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

#23253

On 02/01/2016 20:46, Mr Macaw wrote:
> On Sat, 02 Jan 2016 03:41:41 -0000, Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net> wrote:

>>    It will surely filter down to all speakers from there. Frankly
>>    I think it sounds more educated than "dived" and is
>>    more specific than "jumped".
>
> Would you say jove for the past tense of jive?  Love for the past tense
> of live?

Drove for the past tense of drive... oh, wait...

-- 
Gordon Davie
Edinburgh, Scotland

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

#23256

On Mon, 04 Jan 2016 09:06:38 -0000, GordonD <g.davie@btinternet.com> wrote:

> On 02/01/2016 20:46, Mr Macaw wrote:
>> On Sat, 02 Jan 2016 03:41:41 -0000, Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net> wrote:
>
>>>    It will surely filter down to all speakers from there. Frankly
>>>    I think it sounds more educated than "dived" and is
>>>    more specific than "jumped".
>>
>> Would you say jove for the past tense of jive?  Love for the past tense
>> of live?
>
> Drove for the past tense of drive... oh, wait...

Stop avoiding the question.

-- 
A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death -- Albert Einstein

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

#23236

In article <7vqb8b95jor48901lu05sihhlpnvff4i8j@4ax.com>,
 Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net> wrote:

> On Thu, 31 Dec 2015 17:11:41 -0000, "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> wrote:
> 
> >On Thu, 31 Dec 2015 03:19:07 -0000, Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 30 Dec 2015 19:23:21 -0000, "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Wed, 30 Dec 2015 18:58:53 -0000, Dr. Jai Maharaj 
> >>> <alt.fan.jai-maharaj@googlegroups.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> In article <op.yagzluoy86ebyl@red.lan>,
> >>>> "Mr Macaw" <n...@spam.com> posted:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 15 million people have spelt length as lenght on the
> >>>>> internet, and they actually think it's correct, not just
> >>>>> a typo!
> >>>>
> >>>> "spelt"
> >>>> about 12,700,000 search results.
> >>>>
> >>>> "spelled"
> >>>> about 50,500,000 search results.
> >>>
> >>> Those are both words, with a subtle difference not many people care 
> >>> about.  In my example, lenght is not a word.
> >>
> >>    "Spelt" is English english. "Spelled" is more the American version.
> >
> >No.  Plenty friends here in the UK use spelled and say it's "correct". 
> 
>    If you bring up an American news source, look for stories
>    about people who were arrested by the police, you will 
>    almost always see the word "pleaded" - guilty or innocent -
>    when he appeared before the judge. The use of "pled" is
>    increasingly rare. 
> 
>    Our dictionaries say "pleaded" and "pled" are both correct. 
> 

I brought this up a short time ago, because I have been hearing 
"pleaded" for a while and I thought the change from "pled" had been 
recent. However, many people said that pleaded has been used for quite 
some time, both in AmE and BrE. So, I don't know why I thought "pled" 
was common. Unless, it was common 50+ years ago, which to me is recent.

-- 
charles

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

#23243

On Sun, 03 Jan 2016 01:29:54 -0000, Charles Bishop <ctbishop@earthlink.net> wrote:

> In article <7vqb8b95jor48901lu05sihhlpnvff4i8j@4ax.com>,
>  Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 31 Dec 2015 17:11:41 -0000, "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> wrote:
>>
>> >On Thu, 31 Dec 2015 03:19:07 -0000, Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Wed, 30 Dec 2015 19:23:21 -0000, "Mr Macaw" <no@spam.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> On Wed, 30 Dec 2015 18:58:53 -0000, Dr. Jai Maharaj
>> >>> <alt.fan.jai-maharaj@googlegroups.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> In article <op.yagzluoy86ebyl@red.lan>,
>> >>>> "Mr Macaw" <n...@spam.com> posted:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> 15 million people have spelt length as lenght on the
>> >>>>> internet, and they actually think it's correct, not just
>> >>>>> a typo!
>> >>>>
>> >>>> "spelt"
>> >>>> about 12,700,000 search results.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> "spelled"
>> >>>> about 50,500,000 search results.
>> >>>
>> >>> Those are both words, with a subtle difference not many people care
>> >>> about.  In my example, lenght is not a word.
>> >>
>> >>    "Spelt" is English english. "Spelled" is more the American version.
>> >
>> >No.  Plenty friends here in the UK use spelled and say it's "correct".
>>
>>    If you bring up an American news source, look for stories
>>    about people who were arrested by the police, you will
>>    almost always see the word "pleaded" - guilty or innocent -
>>    when he appeared before the judge. The use of "pled" is
>>    increasingly rare.
>>
>>    Our dictionaries say "pleaded" and "pled" are both correct.
>>
>
> I brought this up a short time ago, because I have been hearing
> "pleaded" for a while and I thought the change from "pled" had been
> recent. However, many people said that pleaded has been used for quite
> some time, both in AmE and BrE. So, I don't know why I thought "pled"
> was common. Unless, it was common 50+ years ago, which to me is recent.

Pled sounds ridiculous to me, rather like "pleb".  Doesn't sound like a real word.

-- 
He saw her in her birthday suit swimming by the pier
She said, "Please go away," but he pretended not to hear.
"If you don't go I'll stay in here 'til it's dark."
'That's OK by me," he said, "I only came to feed the shark."
-- Benny Hill

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

Back to top | Article view | misc.writing

csiph-web