Re: Occupation-derived surnames

From	GordonD <g.davie@btinternet.com>
Newsgroups	alt.usage.english
Subject	Re: Occupation-derived surnames
Date	2017-06-08 11:02 +0100
Message-ID	<epsll9FntntU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink)
References	(8 earlier) <gmtohc9a8lk0u2td0cifm2vqkmagi1c6co@4ax.com> <5129be3d56.pnyoung@pnyoung.ormail.co.uk> <lb2phchr11vn00bqtav5dagdlbotsomdv1@4ax.com> <2769c23d56.pnyoung@pnyoung.ormail.co.uk> <751b07e8-15b2-4b29-a4ad-909bb392e042@googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On 08/06/2017 04:02, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 17, 2017 at 2:12:08 PM UTC-4, Peter Young wrote:
>> On 17 May 2017  Mack A. Damia <drsteerforth@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 17 May 2017 18:23:20 +0100, Peter Young <pnyoung@ormail.co.uk>
>>> wrote:
>>
>>>> On 17 May 2017  Mack A. Damia <drsteerforth@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, 17 May 2017 11:56:33 -0400, Tony Cooper
>>>>> <tonycooper214@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, 17 May 2017 15:53:14 +0100, "Peter Duncanson [BrE]"
>>>>>> <mail@peterduncanson.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That is formal approval by the Queen. She is "advised" by her ministers
>>>>>>> to grant approval. That is advice that she can't refuse.
>>>>
>>>>> She can, but it would be a constitutional crisis.  Can't she fire her
>>>>> ministers if she wants to?  Same as DJT.  If they don't give you what
>>>>> you want, fire them.
>>>>
>>>>>> The play/TV show "King Charles III" hinged on Charles, as King,
>>>>>> refusing to sign a bill presented to him.
>>>>
>>>> In the play, a constitutional crisis did occur. He then exerted his
>>>> "constitutional right" to dissolve Parliament. Eventually the King had
>>>> to abdicate.
>>
>>> Never watched it.  Is this supposed to be Prince Charles, QE2's son?
>>
>> Indeed so. He refuses to give Royal Consent to a Bill limiting press
>> freedom, leading to the said crisis.
>>
>> I thought it was an excellent play, but my friend-who-is-a-lady has
>> reservations about portraying living persons on the stage.
>>
>> See: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Charles_III_(play)> for a
>> synopsis.
> 
> Channel 50.1 (NJTV) showed it this evening. Was anyone else put off by the
> contortions in syntax to fit the dialogue into "Shakespearean" blank verse,
> with rhymed couplets to end scenes, no less?


I hadn't heard ahead of time that the play was written in this manner.
Once I realised what they were doing I quite enjoyed it.

-- 
Gordon Davie
Edinburgh, Scotland

Thread

Re: Occupation-derived surnames Peter Young <pnyoung@ormail.co.uk> - 2017-05-17 18:23 +0100
  Re: Occupation-derived surnames Peter Young <pnyoung@ormail.co.uk> - 2017-05-17 19:09 +0100
    Re: Occupation-derived surnames David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2017-05-17 12:12 -0700
    Re: Occupation-derived surnames "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net> - 2017-06-07 20:02 -0700
      Re: Occupation-derived surnames GordonD <g.davie@btinternet.com> - 2017-06-08 11:02 +0100
        Re: Occupation-derived surnames "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net> - 2017-06-08 04:54 -0700
          Re: Occupation-derived surnames "Peter Duncanson [BrE]" <mail@peterduncanson.net> - 2017-06-08 13:44 +0100
            Re: Occupation-derived surnames "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net> - 2017-06-08 06:26 -0700
          Re: Occupation-derived surnames GordonD <g.davie@btinternet.com> - 2017-06-09 07:24 +0100
            Re: Occupation-derived surnames "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net> - 2017-06-09 04:33 -0700
  Re: Occupation-derived surnames Peter Young <pnyoung@ormail.co.uk> - 2017-05-17 20:12 +0100
  Re: Occupation-derived surnames Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> - 2017-05-17 20:16 +0100

csiph-web