On 2022-05-20 22:23, Tony Cooper wrote:
> On Sat, 21 May 2022 13:19:45 +1000, Peter Moylan
> <peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 21/05/22 11:48, Jerry Friedman wrote:
>>> On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 7:30:48 PM UTC-6, Peter Moylan wrote:
>>
>>>> In that category, a phrase that particularly strikes me is "Gees
>>>> cripes". Apparently most people are unaware that that has a
>>>> religious origin.
>>>
>>> I've never seen or heard that phrase. I figured out early on that
>>> "Jeez" has a religious origin, but I was surprised to learn that
>>> "Sheesh" is supposed to have the same origin.
>>
>> That surprises me, too. I have always assumed that "sheesh" was a minced
>> "shit".
>>
>> Google doesn't help. The very first hit says that it was invented by
>> someone on TikTok, and it takes an effort to find the ones that don't
>> mention TikTok. One site traces it from Hebrew ?????????? down through ??????
>> amd Iesus and finally to sheesh. I'd never heard of those earlier steps,
>> and I'm still not convinced about the final step.
>
> I can't provide proof, but I'm sure "sheesh" was commonly used long
> before TikTok came along. Or mobile phones. Or even cordless phones.

Absolutely. I think I used that in the 60s, if not before.

--
I recenly heard that scientists have isolated the gene that makes
scientists want to isolate genes.

Remember when Jerry Friedman bragged outrageously? That was Friday:
> On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 5:22:08 PM UTC-6, snide...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Friday, Paul Wolff murmurred ...
>>> On Thu, 19 May 2022, at 06:41:27, Peter T. Daniels posted:
> ...
>
>>>> OED does a truly lousy job with "grapheme" -- the definition it offers
>>>> doesn't even cover the examples it gives. There's a paragraph about
>>>> it in my book.
>>>
>>> Forgive me, but I had to smile here. I'm very interested in graphene, so
>>> much so that I don't need the OED to define it for me. Or was that not a
>>> typo, but something else? A graphic meme, perhaps. And I'm still smiling
>>> to myself at the thought.
>
>> Not a typo, a different word. You read of phonemes here, which are
>> sound pieces of a word (very roughly, syllables as spoken).
>
> The linguists will be along soon, but that would be less rough if you'd
> said "sounds" instead of "syllables".

I said "sound pieces" deliberately.

>> Do you not
>> see that "grapheme" is a corresponding word referring to writing?
>
> I actually wouldn't mind a bit of discussion of graphemes, to the extent
> that they exist.

You want more than "the smallest meaningful contrastive unit in a
writing system" ?

/dps

--
"I'm glad unicorns don't ever need upgrades."
"We are as up as it is possible to get graded!"
_Phoebe and Her Unicorn_, 2016.05.15

Fri, 20 May 2022 10:32:49 -0700 (PDT): "Peter T. Daniels"
<grammatim@verizon.net> scribeva:

>On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 1:01:21 PM UTC-4, ruudhar...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Sunday, May 15, 2022 at 8:13:07 PM UTC+2, Ruud Harmsen wrote:
>> > This morning I heard a silly ad on Youtube, in which an English
>> > expression was translated literally. It was wrong, because the same
>> > expression exists in Dutch, but slightly different, minus one word.
>> >
>> > Now I wish I could remember what the expression was. But I can't.
>>
>> Heard it again. It was about an air conditioner.
>> "Heeft u genoeg gehad van warme [something]".
>>
>> The almost identical expressions are:
>> English: "I've had enough of it."
>
>No "of it."

Both, say these URLs:
https://www.ldoceonline.com/dictionary/have-had-enough-of-something
https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/have+had+enough+of+him
And "had enough of him" /her/you etc. googles.

>> Dutch: "Ik heb er genoeg van".
>>
>> So a correct translation would have left out the "gehad" as the direct
>> translation of the English "had". This bad translation, with a human
>> voice, pretending to be a computer voice by using a strange intonation
>> and a strange rhythm, was word for word. Probably intentionally done
>> so badly. To irritate people, or make them laugh (not me), and thereby
>> getting more attention.

--
Ruud Harmsen, http://rudhar.com

On Friday, Sam Plusnet queried:
> On 20-May-22 21:46, Tony Cooper wrote:
>
>> Windows users (of which PTD is one) can easily delete all cookies at
>> any time. I know people who delete all cookies after every online
>> session. I sometimes do, but clearing cookies also clears the
>> browser history and saved passwords. I don't consider that a problem
>> because my passwords are stored in a password manager, and I seldom
>> need to refer to my browser history.
>
> Where I visit a website fairly often, I usually find cookies to be
> convenient.
>
> When accessing a website on a one-off basis, I do so in a "private window"
> and accept any cookies it may care to to throw at my browser - because they
> are all discarded when I close that private window.
>
> I use Opera, but Firefox offers the same facility.
> I don't know anything about other browsers.

Chrome also has that feature. I think that among some other browsers,
less well known, that might be offered as the default.

/dps

--
And the Raiders and the Broncos have life now in the West. I thought
they were both nearly dead if not quite really most sincerely dead. --
Mike Salfino, fivethirtyeight.com

Sat, 21 May 2022 11:46:12 +1000: Peter Moylan
<peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> scribeva:

>On 21/05/22 03:01, ruudhar...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Sunday, May 15, 2022 at 8:13:07 PM UTC+2, Ruud Harmsen wrote:
>
>>> This morning I heard a silly ad on Youtube, in which an English
>>> expression was translated literally. It was wrong, because the same
>>> expression exists in Dutch, but slightly different, minus one
>>> word.
>>>
>>> Now I wish I could remember what the expression was. But I can't.
>>
>> Heard it again. It was about an air conditioner. "Heeft u genoeg
>> gehad van warme [something]".
>>
>> The almost identical expressions are: English: "I've had enough of
>> it." Dutch: "Ik heb er genoeg van".
>>
>> So a correct translation would have left out the "gehad" as the
>> direct translation of the English "had". This bad translation, with
>> a human voice, pretending to be a computer voice by using a strange
>> intonation and a strange rhythm, was word for word. Probably
>> intentionally done so badly. To irritate people, or make them laugh
>> (not me), and thereby getting more attention.
>
>I once embarrassed myself at a meal with a French-speaking family. When
>I was offered a second serving, I replied "Non, merci. J'en ai eu assez".
>
>That "J'en ai eu assez" means literally "I've had enough of it", and

Or even more litterally, in Dutch:
Ik heb er genoeg van gehad.
The "en" of French corresponds to Dutch "er".

That "er", by the way, is originally, in some senses, probably
including this one, a weak form of "daar" (English "there").
Colloquially, written "er" is still often pronounced as "d'r" /d@r/,
which makes the connection clearer.

There is also French "y", and "dont", which are similar, but
different.
10 euros, y compris le TVA.
10 euros, dont 1,67 est le TVA.
(Hope that's correct, French is my weakest language. TVA = VAT = value
added tax).

>it's just as offensive as the English version can be. Don't say it
>(in either language) unless you want to start a fight.

--
Ruud Harmsen, http://rudhar.com

Peter Moylan is guilty of <t69g98$mo9$1@dont-email.me> as of 5/20/2022
6:46:12 PM
> On 21/05/22 03:01, ruudhar...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Sunday, May 15, 2022 at 8:13:07 PM UTC+2, Ruud Harmsen wrote:
>
>>> This morning I heard a silly ad on Youtube, in which an English
>>> expression was translated literally. It was wrong, because the same
>>> expression exists in Dutch, but slightly different, minus one
>>> word.
>>>
>>> Now I wish I could remember what the expression was. But I can't.
>>
>> Heard it again. It was about an air conditioner. "Heeft u genoeg
>> gehad van warme [something]".
>>
>> The almost identical expressions are: English: "I've had enough of
>> it." Dutch: "Ik heb er genoeg van".
>>
>> So a correct translation would have left out the "gehad" as the
>> direct translation of the English "had". This bad translation, with
>> a human voice, pretending to be a computer voice by using a strange
>> intonation and a strange rhythm, was word for word. Probably
>> intentionally done so badly. To irritate people, or make them laugh
>> (not me), and thereby getting more attention.
>
> I once embarrassed myself at a meal with a French-speaking family. When
> I was offered a second serving, I replied "Non, merci. J'en ai eu assez".
>
> That "J'en ai eu assez" means literally "I've had enough of it", and
> it's just as offensive as the English version can be. Don't say it
> (in either language) unless you want to start a fight.

Du hattest eine Nase voll?

/dps

--
"What do you think of my cart, Miss Morland? A neat one, is not it?
Well hung: curricle-hung in fact. Come sit by me and we'll test the
springs."
(Speculative fiction by H.Lacedaemonian.)

Sat, 21 May 2022 11:40:04 +1000: Peter Moylan
<peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> scribeva:

>On 20/05/22 23:49, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>> On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 9:40:54 AM UTC-4, Bebercito wrote:
>
>>> You haven't supported that claim and no native BrE-speakers here
>>> have confirmed it. The only transpondian difference in
>>> pronunciation is the shift of the stress from the first (BrE) to
>>> the second (AmE) syllable.
>>
>> The BrE pronunciation is more "authentic"? The stress shift occurred
>> in AmE?!?!?!?!
>
>That's part of a fairly widespread phenomenon. Words of relatively
>recent French origin tend to acquire final-syllable stress in AmE, but
>not in BrE. That's because the British, who have much greater exposure
>to French, are more likely to copy the French pronunciation, while
>Americans seem to be more susceptible to the myth that French has
>final-syllable stress.
>
>(Exception: it's a mystery to me how the English got their "garridge"
>pronunciation.)

Similarity with words like marriage, mortgage ("morgidge"), etc.?
--
Ruud Harmsen, http://rudhar.com

Watch this space, where Ruud Harmsen advised that...
> Fri, 20 May 2022 10:32:49 -0700 (PDT): "Peter T. Daniels"
> <grammatim@verizon.net> scribeva:
>
>> On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 1:01:21 PM UTC-4, ruudhar...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Sunday, May 15, 2022 at 8:13:07 PM UTC+2, Ruud Harmsen wrote:
>>>> This morning I heard a silly ad on Youtube, in which an English
>>>> expression was translated literally. It was wrong, because the same
>>>> expression exists in Dutch, but slightly different, minus one word.
>>>>
>>>> Now I wish I could remember what the expression was. But I can't.
>>>
>>> Heard it again. It was about an air conditioner.
>>> "Heeft u genoeg gehad van warme [something]".
>>>
>>> The almost identical expressions are:
>>> English: "I've had enough of it."
>>
>> No "of it."
>
> Both, say these URLs:
> https://www.ldoceonline.com/dictionary/have-had-enough-of-something
> https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/have+had+enough+of+him
> And "had enough of him" /her/you etc. googles.

And there's plenty of use of "I've had enough of that!"

>>> Dutch: "Ik heb er genoeg van".
>>>
>>> So a correct translation would have left out the "gehad" as the direct
>>> translation of the English "had". This bad translation, with a human
>>> voice, pretending to be a computer voice by using a strange intonation
>>> and a strange rhythm, was word for word. Probably intentionally done
>>> so badly. To irritate people, or make them laugh (not me), and thereby
>>> getting more attention.

I'd be inclined, in your last sentence, to include the second "to" ...
"or to make them laugh". And I might do your parenthetical as "(I
didn't)".

I don't know if I'd laugh or snort in an equivalent situation. I do
raise an eyebrow when Speechelo's "Joey" reads his advertising script.
And a lot of ootoob commercials seem to use "Joey"'s colleagues.

/dps

--
"That’s where I end with this kind of conversation: Language is
crucial, and yet not the answer."
Jonathan Rosa, sociocultural and linguistic anthropologist,
Stanford.,2020

After serious thinking Peter Moylan wrote :
> On 20/05/22 10:21, Sam Plusnet wrote:
>> On 19-May-22 21:30, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>> Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 19-May-22 5:27, Tony Cooper wrote:
>>>>> The phrase comes from the Second Amendment to the United
>>>>> States Constitution: "A well regulated Militia, being
>>>>> necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the
>>>>> people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
>>>>
>>>> Well if it's bear arms you want, why not stick to some bells and
>>>> a pepper spray?
>>>
>>> Restricting it to what the founders knew about would also be fine.
>>> (so muzzle loading black powder muskets and pistols)
>>>
>>> Swords allowed too,
>>
>> I would hold off on all of those until there is a bit more progress
>> on that Militia. Who is responsible for doing the regulating?
>
> If I am not misremembering the history, the intent of that amendment was
> to ensure that the federal government could not create its own army. The
> individual states needed the power to create and regulate their own
> militia, as a guard against the central government grabbing power.
>
> That ship has now sailed, so the amendment is effectively obsolete.

Yeah, I'm not sure it stayed in port a full 20 years. Alexander
Hamilton was one of the proponents, and he exited stage left. However,
the various units of the National Guard are regulated by both the DoD
and the various states (usually through the Governors' office, AIUI),
so the spirit still has a little presence.

/dps

--
"First thing in the morning, before I have coffee, I read the obits, If
I'm not in it, I'll have breakfast." -- Carl Reiner, to CBS News in
2015.

On Fri, 20 May 2022 20:50:05 +0100
Paul Wolff <bounceme@thiswontwork.wolff.co.uk> wrote:

> On Fri, 20 May 2022, at 19:48:06, Adam Funk posted:
> >On 2022-05-19, Sam Plusnet wrote:
> >> On 19-May-22 1:42, Peter Moylan wrote:
> >>> On 19/05/22 02:31, Sam Plusnet wrote:
> >>>> On 18-May-22 1:59, Tony Cooper wrote:
> >>>>> On Wed, 18 May 2022 01:33:33 +0100, Sam Plusnet <not@home.com>
>
> >>>> (Of When I'm sixtyfour.)
> >>>>
> >>>>>> I don't know where "Chuck" came from.  It isn't a diminutive form
> >>>>>> of Charles that I've ever heard in BrE.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Some here will remember Charles Riggs.  While he lived in Ireland,
> >>>>> he was an American.  He had been living in Ireland when I first
> >>>>> encountered him here in a.u.e.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> He posted as "Chuck Riggs" and at other times as "Charles Riggs".
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>https://www.mail-archive.com/alt.usage.english@googlegroups.com/msg0
> >>>>>0070.html
> >>>>>
> >>>>> In this thread, he posts as "Chuck", but discusses "chuckless
> >>>>> Ireland".
> >>>>>
> >>>>> https://alt.usage.english.narkive.com/r9E9jpWv/literary-bulletin#post2
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> Fair enough, but is any evidence that Paul McCartney knew of aue when
> >>>> he wrote the song - in 1967?
> >>>
> >>> His choosing that name continues to be a mystery. I would have guessed
> >>> that Chuck is a name that one almost never encounters in England.
> >>>
> >> By 1967 they'd visited the US at least a couple of times. If they came
> >> across it there, they might have remembered & used it simply because of
> >> its novelty value.
> >
> >Could be. I've never met an English person named or nicknamed "Chuck".
> >
> Nor I (presuming perfect memory). Isn't it just a familiar diminutive,
> like 'duck', 'ducky', or 'ducks'? Suspect fowl play if you like.

It shure is, ma liddle chickadee. </bad WCFields impersonation>

Awright Hen?

--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

Just this Friday, lar3ryca puzzled about:
> On 2022-05-20 22:23, Tony Cooper wrote:
>> On Sat, 21 May 2022 13:19:45 +1000, Peter Moylan
>> <peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On 21/05/22 11:48, Jerry Friedman wrote:
>>>> On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 7:30:48 PM UTC-6, Peter Moylan wrote:
>>>
>>>>> In that category, a phrase that particularly strikes me is "Gees
>>>>> cripes". Apparently most people are unaware that that has a
>>>>> religious origin.
>>>>
>>>> I've never seen or heard that phrase. I figured out early on that
>>>> "Jeez" has a religious origin, but I was surprised to learn that
>>>> "Sheesh" is supposed to have the same origin.
>>>
>>> That surprises me, too. I have always assumed that "sheesh" was a minced
>>> "shit".
>>>
>>> Google doesn't help. The very first hit says that it was invented by
>>> someone on TikTok, and it takes an effort to find the ones that don't
>>> mention TikTok. One site traces it from Hebrew ?????????? down through
>>> ??????
>>> amd Iesus and finally to sheesh. I'd never heard of those earlier steps,
>>> and I'm still not convinced about the final step.
>>
>> I can't provide proof, but I'm sure "sheesh" was commonly used long
>> before TikTok came along. Or mobile phones. Or even cordless phones.
>
> Absolutely. I think I used that in the 60s, if not before.

I think I even heard it in some Hanna-Barbera cartoons, most likely
from Mr Jinks during his pursuit of Pixie and Dixie.

/dps

--
"This is all very fine, but let us not be carried away be excitement,
but ask calmly, how does this person feel about in in his cooler
moments next day, with six or seven thousand feet of snow and stuff on
top of him?"
_Roughing It_, Mark Twain.

On Fri, 20 May 2022 19:31:29 -0400
Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, 20 May 2022 22:50:57 +0100, Paul Wolff
> <bounceme@thiswontwork.wolff.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
> >>Where do you draw the line? Should the BBC hold off on stories about
> >>Monkeypox until there's a reported case in the UK?
> >>
> >Too late - we have had twenty of them. But the number of Covid-19 cases,
> >which I am pretty sure is more than twenty, was strangely not mentioned.
>
> I am waiting for Tucker Carlson to report that monkeypox is part of
> The Great Replacement Theory. He will probably question if monkeys
> from the Dark Continent are inflicting a pox on the legacy voters in
> the US. However, with no evidence to support that Carlson is a
> racist, he is not using "monkey" in *that* sense.
>

I'll try hard to not be seen as racist here.

Yup, here's the 'but'

Some diseases are transmitted to the human population in Africa by close proximity to and eating monkeys,
and there's some transmissions that can only be by by *very* close proximity.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2464272/
NSFW!

Of course eating pangolins is also not such a good move, nor is cramming thousands of chickens into a confined space. Or French Kissing strangers. I mean the way the French do on both cheeks, not oh pass me a bigger shovel.

> --
>
> Tony Cooper - Orlando Florida
>
> I read and post to this group as a form of entertainment.

--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

On Fri, 20 May 2022 17:55:44 -0700
Snidely <snidely.too@gmail.com> wrote:

> Paul Wolff wrote on 5/20/2022 :
>
> > And I don't believe that /any/ cookies can truly be
> > "strictly necessary" in order to show a simple web page. But I respect
> > Amnesty International's ethos.
>
> It is often true that a /single/ webpage can be shown without the use
> of cookies, but most sites expect you to examine more than one webpage
> during a visit. Things that directly effect your viewing of the
> subsequent pages, such as language settings and other preferences, then
> become cookie batter. Then again, some toolsets for building and
> deploying the webpage source may expect cookie values to be obtainable.
> Rewriting the page to not use those toolsets is probably more
> expensive than its value warrants, and would also slow loading of the
> page; this can be noticeable even at giganet speeds, and may require

Heh; never mind the humongous JavaScript download. And ubiquitous embedded google tracking bits.

> you to login for every page of your account.
>
> Of course, it is difficult for an outside observer to judge the
> necessity for cookie values in detail, because cookies are typically
> encrypted to avoid the purloining of the information by third parties.
> That also makes it possible to mask the information from the client,
> depending on the developer tools the client has.
>
> /dps
>
> --
> The presence of this syntax results from the fact that SQLite is really
> a Tcl extension that has escaped into the wild.
> <http://www.sqlite.org/lang_expr.html>

A database just for signatures?

--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

On Fri, 20 May 2022 17:34:53 -0700 (PDT)
Jerry Friedman <jerry_friedman@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 4:15:39 PM UTC-6, Paul Wolff wrote:
> > On Thu, 19 May 2022, at 06:31:20, Peter T. Daniels posted:
> > >On Wednesday, May 18, 2022 at 4:53:21 PM UTC-4, Paul Wolff wrote:
> ...
>
> > >> It seems to me that 'how' in 'how are you?' is an interrogative adverb,
> > >> so any good one-word answer must have adverbial force.
> > >
> > >Good grief.
> > >
> > >"How are you?" "Poorly." That's considered dialectal/nonstandard.
> > >
> > >"How's the tea?" "Tepidly."
> >
> > Taste the tea, I pray you, as I pour'd it to you, tepidly on the tongue;
> > but if you gulp it, as many of our players do, I had as lief
> > the ale-conner quaffed my brew.
>
> Brew, brew, brew your pot
> At one for half-past three.
Issat the time already?
> Tepidly, tepidly, tepidly, tepidly,
> Not my cup of tea.
>
Whot, no buttered scones?

--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

On Sat, 21 May 2022 11:33:13 +1000
Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:

> On 20/05/22 22:47, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 12:39:19 AM UTC-4, Bebercito wrote:
> >> Le jeudi 19 mai 2022 à 23:09:49 UTC+2, Peter T. Daniels a écrit :
> >>> On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 4:53:55 PM UTC-4, Bebercito wrote:
> >
> >>>> But ptd seems to think that "kaff" is a possible BrE pronunciation
> >>>> in "Le Café" (see upthread), whereas it's not.
> >>> I'll ask again. Where the hell do you see "Le Café"?
> >>
> >> My mistake, it was "The Cafe", but that doesn't change anything
> >> as "café" and "cafe" are pronounced the same , i.e. as "kaffay".
> >
> > In French.
> >
> > In American English.
> >
> > Not necessarily, however, in British English.
>
> Yes, in British English too.
>
> The word "caff" has a different spelling.
>
How dare you tell PTD what Brits say & think!

--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

On Fri, 20 May 2022 23:33:00 -0700
Snidely <snidely.too@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Friday, Sam Plusnet queried:
> > On 20-May-22 21:46, Tony Cooper wrote:
> >
> >> Windows users (of which PTD is one) can easily delete all cookies at
> >> any time. I know people who delete all cookies after every online
> >> session. I sometimes do, but clearing cookies also clears the
> >> browser history and saved passwords. I don't consider that a problem
> >> because my passwords are stored in a password manager, and I seldom
> >> need to refer to my browser history.
> >
> > Where I visit a website fairly often, I usually find cookies to be
> > convenient.
> >
> > When accessing a website on a one-off basis, I do so in a "private window"
> > and accept any cookies it may care to to throw at my browser - because they
> > are all discarded when I close that private window.
> >
> > I use Opera, but Firefox offers the same facility.
> > I don't know anything about other browsers.
>
> Chrome also has that feature. I think that among some other browsers,
> less well known, that might be offered as the default.
>
Iron is Chrome without the google bits;
https://www.srware.net/iron/
(it's stuck at vn 49 for my XP box though)

--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

On 21/05/22 16:42, Snidely wrote:
> Peter Moylan is guilty of <t69g98$mo9$1@dont-email.me> as of 5/20/2022
> 6:46:12 PM

>> I once embarrassed myself at a meal with a French-speaking family. When
>> I was offered a second serving, I replied "Non, merci. J'en ai eu assez".
>>
>> That "J'en ai eu assez" means literally "I've had enough of it", and
>> it's just as offensive as the English version can be. Don't say it
>> (in either language) unless you want to start a fight.
>
> Du hattest eine Nase voll?

Thanks, I didn't know that expression. I'd be more likely to say "I've
had a gut full".

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

On 21/05/2022 10:43 am, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
> On Fri, 20 May 2022 23:33:00 -0700
> Snidely <snidely.too@gmail.com> wrote:

<snip>

>> Chrome also has that feature. I think that among some other browsers,
>> less well known, that might be offered as the default.
>>
> Iron is Chrome without the google bits;

....but two extra protons and two extra neutrons.

--
Richard Heathfield
Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line 4 vacant - apply within

Le 20/05/2022 à 14:13, Peter T. Daniels a écrit :
> On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 1:38:12 AM UTC-4, Hibou wrote:
>>
>> This is just one type of material - there are also TV series etc. - and
>> such exposure is how British people come to be thoroughly acquainted
>> with American speech patterns.
>
> Do you not understand, or do you not believe the fact at hand, which has
> been told to you by others here as well? Merely being exposed to another
> dialect does not make someone able to speak with that dialect. [...]

I have already replied to that point. "... it isn't a question of
learning to talk like an American, but of observing how Americans talk"
- <news:t622ll$v3c$3@gioia.aioe.org> on 22/05/18.

I don't think I can put it more simply.

>> I think you're confused. What I said was (of 'good' as a reply to "How
>> are you?": "I think it's an example of linguistic inflation. Britons
>> aren't immune to it, but I think Americans indulge in it more."
>
> No,

Yes. I said it in <news:t5ve8g$11d4$1@gioia.aioe.org> on 22/05/17.

> what you said is that a couple of expressions were Eastpondian
> versus equivalents in Westpondian. One was "fine" vs. "good," one
> was "I've eaten" vs. "I already ate." You were simply wrong to claim that
> the supposed "Eastpondian" ones don't occur in "Westpondian."

I have made no such claim. If you think I have, then please indicate the
message in which you think I made it and quote the passage.

On 5/20/2022 1:32 PM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> ruudhar...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Ruud Harmsen wrote:

>>> This morning I heard a silly ad on Youtube, in which an English
>>> expression was translated literally. It was wrong, because the
>>> same expression exists in Dutch, but slightly different, minus
>>> one word.

>>> Now I wish I could remember what the expression was. But I
>>> can't.

>> Heard it again. It was about an air conditioner. "Heeft u genoeg
>> gehad van warme [something]".

>> The almost identical expressions are: English: "I've had enough of
>> it."

> No "of it."

>> Dutch: "Ik heb er genoeg van".

>> So a correct translation would have left out the "gehad" as the
>> direct translation of the English "had". This bad translation, with
>> a human voice, pretending to be a computer voice by using a strange
>> intonation and a strange rhythm, was word for word. Probably
>> intentionally done so badly. To irritate people, or make them laugh
>> (not me), and thereby getting more attention.

"... to make them laugh and thereby get ..." or "... to make them laugh,
thereby getting ...".

On 5/21/2022 2:41 AM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
> Jerry Friedman <jerry_friedman@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Paul Wolff wrote:
>>> Peter T. Daniels posted:
>>>> Paul Wolff wrote:
>> ...

>>>>> It seems to me that 'how' in 'how are you?' is an
>>>>> interrogative adverb, so any good one-word answer must have
>>>>> adverbial force.

>>>> Good grief.

>>>> "How are you?" "Poorly." That's considered
>>>> dialectal/nonstandard.

>>>> "How's the tea?" "Tepidly."

>>> Taste the tea, I pray you, as I pour'd it to you, tepidly on the
>>> tongue; but if you gulp it, as many of our players do, I had as
>>> lief the ale-conner quaffed my brew.

>> Brew, brew, brew your pot At one for half-past three.
> Issat the time already?
>> Tepidly, tepidly, tepidly, tepidly, Not my cup of tea.

> Whot, no buttered scones?

Not till Wednesday.

On 5/20/2022 6:55 PM, Quinn C wrote:
> * CDB:
>> Quinn C wrote:
>>> CDB:
>>>> Quinn C wrote:
>>>>> CDB:

>>>> [Veras]

>>>>>> And who can forget the beautiful Vera Hruba Ralston?

>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whslTp-Oe7g

>>>>> Not me, since I never knew her in the first place.

>> Me neither, but I have remembered that name for many years.

>>>> How about the ever-popular Mae Busch?

>>> Since she played in Laurel & Hardy movies, I've certainly seen
>>> her, but didn't remember her name. The secondary characters in
>>> those movies tend to not have a lot of personality.

>>> I didn't recognize any other movie titles. What do you remember
>>> her for?

>> Mostly for being a stock line of Jackie Gleason's on '50s
>> television, with "Busch" pronounced "boosh" [buS].

> Well, another unfamiliar name. You had to be there, I guess.

One was pathetically grateful for anything watchable.

> On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 10:35:27 AM UTC-6, Paul Wolff wrote:
> > The laws governing abortion in Ireland (both countries) are far more
> > relevant to the United Kingdom than those the other side of the
> > Atlantic, in my judgement. They affect us directly. Has yesterday's
> > abortion news concerning Northern Ireland hit the BBC bulletins with
> > such a fanfare yet?

The BBC (and other UK news media) have been reporting NI's abortion
issues to RUK for years. Because womens' rights are a major issue to
at least half of their audience.

If you were unaware of that, it's a reflection on yourself rather than
UK news reports.

Most of the BBC/ UK /Irish news media audiences have an interest in/
follow NI politics and governance, perhaps you're also unaware of the
reasons for that?

Janet

In article <6c4llixbhs.ln2@news.ducksburg.com>, a24061@ducksburg.com
says...
> Could be. I've never met an English person named or nicknamed "Chuck".

Me neither.

OTOH, like many other persons in all parts of Britain I have often been
addressed informally by strangers as chook, chicken, chick,hen,ducks.

Persons who have one may be informally addressed as cock, but not me.

HTH

Janet

In article <LqckdzotD$hiFAZR@wolff.co.uk>,
bounceme@thiswontwork.wolff.co.uk says...
> >
> >Could be. I've never met an English person named or nicknamed "Chuck".
> >
> Nor I (presuming perfect memory). Isn't it just a familiar diminutive,
> like 'duck', 'ducky', or 'ducks'? >

No, that would be "chook".
> suspect fowl play

I refer you to eggspert Liverpool bird, Cilla Black.

Janet.