On Thu, 24 Mar 2022 09:56:49 +0200, Steve Hayes
<hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:

>On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 22:00:57 +1100, Peter Moylan
><peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
>
>>On 22/03/22 21:22, Steve Hayes wrote:
>>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 09:16:57 -0700, Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> You must have a broader range of friends than I do. I've never
>>>> known a horse.
>>>
>>> In which case you probably wouldn't know a canter from a marsh
>>> wiggle.
>>
>>If you've been through the desert on a horse with no name, you probably
>>know what a canter is even if you've never been introduced to the horse.
>>
>>(On the other hand, I did once ride a horse I hadn't been introduced to.
>>It tried to throw me.)
>
>My reason for asking is that I wrote, of a leopard trying to escape
>from a haraaing bird, that it "cantered down the hill".
>
>My wife queried it, and eventually, after much indeterminate and
>inconsequential discussion here, I decided to change it to
>"scampered".
>
>But now someone on Twitter has said that "scampered" is BrE only and
>will be annoying to Americans.

It's neither unknown nor annoying to this American. I wouldn't say
it's commonly used, but it's certainly not rare.

--
The real, original Ken Blake, not some other newcomer

Kerr-Mudd, John <admin@127.0.0.1> wrote:

> On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 11:49:25 -0000
> Janet <nobody@hame.cock> wrote:
>
> > In article <20220322113719.e1d15568ad5a9b6d10833738@g{oogle}mail.com>,
> > anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com says...
> > >
> > > I wrote:
> > >
> > > > Perhaps you were on rather long terms with
> > >
> > > I noticed this, and in deafault of a suitable adjective (in
> > > my ready memory), changed it to "not on familliar terms",
> > > but forgot to re-run the updated message throgh Groff. What
> > > adjective could be used in stead of "not familliar"?
> >
> > "Distant".
> >
> > I hope nobody here has had intercourse with horses, btw.
> >
> Neigh.

There is Poisson statistics about those who may have tried,

Jan

On Thu, 24 Mar 2022 19:59:02 +1100, Peter Moylan
<peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:

>On 24/03/22 18:56, Steve Hayes wrote:
>> On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 22:00:57 +1100, Peter Moylan
>> <peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On 22/03/22 21:22, Steve Hayes wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 09:16:57 -0700, Ken Blake
>>>> <Ken@invalid.news.com> wrote:
>>>>> You must have a broader range of friends than I do. I've never
>>>>> known a horse.
>>>>
>>>> In which case you probably wouldn't know a canter from a marsh
>>>> wiggle.
>>>
>>> If you've been through the desert on a horse with no name, you
>>> probably know what a canter is even if you've never been introduced
>>> to the horse.
>>>
>>> (On the other hand, I did once ride a horse I hadn't been
>>> introduced to. It tried to throw me.)
>>
>> My reason for asking is that I wrote, of a leopard trying to escape
>> from a haraaing bird, that it "cantered down the hill".
>>
>> My wife queried it, and eventually, after much indeterminate and
>> inconsequential discussion here, I decided to change it to
>> "scampered".
>>
>> But now someone on Twitter has said that "scampered" is BrE only and
>> will be annoying to Americans.
>
>What about "ran" or "raced"?

Has anyone suggested "scrambled"?

>
>When people see a leopard moving at speed, they are very unlikely to
>take note of the precise leg movements, unless perhaps they are horse
>fanciers.

--
Rich Ulrich

On Fri, 25 Mar 2022 18:23:19 -0400, Rich Ulrich
<rich.ulrich@comcast.net> wrote:

>On Thu, 24 Mar 2022 19:59:02 +1100, Peter Moylan
><peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
>
>>On 24/03/22 18:56, Steve Hayes wrote:
>>> On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 22:00:57 +1100, Peter Moylan
>>> <peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 22/03/22 21:22, Steve Hayes wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 09:16:57 -0700, Ken Blake
>>>>> <Ken@invalid.news.com> wrote:
>>>>>> You must have a broader range of friends than I do. I've never
>>>>>> known a horse.
>>>>>
>>>>> In which case you probably wouldn't know a canter from a marsh
>>>>> wiggle.
>>>>
>>>> If you've been through the desert on a horse with no name, you
>>>> probably know what a canter is even if you've never been introduced
>>>> to the horse.
>>>>
>>>> (On the other hand, I did once ride a horse I hadn't been
>>>> introduced to. It tried to throw me.)
>>>
>>> My reason for asking is that I wrote, of a leopard trying to escape
>>> from a haraaing bird, that it "cantered down the hill".
>>>
>>> My wife queried it, and eventually, after much indeterminate and
>>> inconsequential discussion here, I decided to change it to
>>> "scampered".
>>>
>>> But now someone on Twitter has said that "scampered" is BrE only and
>>> will be annoying to Americans.
>>
>>What about "ran" or "raced"?
>
>Has anyone suggested "scrambled"?

To me, scampering is fast, playful, movement. "Scrambling" is
attempting to escape or move to a safer space. The context indicates
that "scarmbled" is the more appropriate description.
>
--

Tony Cooper - Orlando Florida

Steve Hayes:
>>>> ...I decided to change it to "scampered".

Rich Ulrich:
>> Has anyone suggested "scrambled"?

Tony Cooper:
> To me, scampering is fast, playful, movement. "Scrambling" is
> attempting to escape or move to a safer space.

Agreed.

> The context indicates that "scarmbled" is the more appropriate description.

Good thing it didn't indicate "scrapmered", then.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto "Let us knot coin gnu werds huitch
msb@vex.net are spelld rong." -- Rik Fischer Smoody

On Fri, 25 Mar 2022 18:23:19 -0400, Rich Ulrich
<rich.ulrich@comcast.net> wrote:

>On Thu, 24 Mar 2022 19:59:02 +1100, Peter Moylan
><peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
>
>>On 24/03/22 18:56, Steve Hayes wrote:
>>> On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 22:00:57 +1100, Peter Moylan
>>> <peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 22/03/22 21:22, Steve Hayes wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 09:16:57 -0700, Ken Blake
>>>>> <Ken@invalid.news.com> wrote:
>>>>>> You must have a broader range of friends than I do. I've never
>>>>>> known a horse.
>>>>>
>>>>> In which case you probably wouldn't know a canter from a marsh
>>>>> wiggle.
>>>>
>>>> If you've been through the desert on a horse with no name, you
>>>> probably know what a canter is even if you've never been introduced
>>>> to the horse.
>>>>
>>>> (On the other hand, I did once ride a horse I hadn't been
>>>> introduced to. It tried to throw me.)
>>>
>>> My reason for asking is that I wrote, of a leopard trying to escape
>>> from a haraaing bird, that it "cantered down the hill".
>>>
>>> My wife queried it, and eventually, after much indeterminate and
>>> inconsequential discussion here, I decided to change it to
>>> "scampered".
>>>
>>> But now someone on Twitter has said that "scampered" is BrE only and
>>> will be annoying to Americans.
>>
>>What about "ran" or "raced"?
>
>Has anyone suggested "scrambled"?

I thought about suggesting it, but I decided that if I did, I might
get egg on my face.

--
The real, original Ken Blake, not some other newcomer

On Thu, 24 Mar 2022 09:56:49 +0200, Steve Hayes
<hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:

> But now someone on Twitter has said that "scampered" is BrE only and
> will be annoying to Americans.
>
That is astounding news to this American.

I do associate it with small prey that frequently needs to scamper,
and playful younglings, but that makes it all the more appropriate to
describe the actions of a large predator escaping from a small bird.

"Cantered" has a more liesurely sound to me: fast, but not panicky.
But I encountered a horse only once in my life, about seventy years
ago, and I hid in the haymow until it went away.

--
Joy Beeson, U.S.A., mostly central Hoosier,
some Northern Indiana, Upstate New York, Florida, and Hawaii
joy beeson at centurylink dot net http://wlweather.net/PAGEJOY/
The above message is a Usenet post.

In message <hkbk3h53nh8d7p95g61sbafplbm47rb2ju@4ax.com> Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 11:50:01 -0000 (UTC), Lewis
> <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> wrote:

>>In message <20220322113149.9d3b3345596e902a4f902854@g{oogle}mail.com> Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> wrote:
>>> Lewis:
>>
>>>> I knew several horses when I rode. Each one had its own
>>>> personality and quirks. For very stupid animals they had
>>>> more character than I expected.
>>
>>> Horses, stupid? Tolstoy's "Strider" and Aitmatov's
>>> "Farewell, Gulsary" portray them as very intelligent crea-
>>> tures, and both the authors had intercourse with horses
>>> throughout large part of their lives. Your experience dif-
>>> fers? Perhaps you were on rather long terms with your hors-
>>> es, only riding, and not really caring for them...
>>
>>Part of having horses around and riding them was a certain amount of
>>tending to them. Brushing down after riding, checking hooves and chekcing
>>they had appropriate food and water were all part of it. I was not by
>>any means a main caretaker, that was other students.
>>
>>
>>Compared to a smart animal, horses are quite dumb, yes. Compared to the animals
>>you would expect to find on a farm they are certainly smarter than the
>>chickens, but no where near as clever as pigs, dogs, cats, or foxes.

> ...or humans (which are also often found on farms).

I'm not going that far!

I did forget possibly the smartest farm animal, at least on some farms,
the goats.

--
THE DEATH OF A WARRIOR OR THE OLD MAN OR THE LITTLE CHILD, THIS I
UNDERSTAND, AND I TAKE AWAY THE PAIN AND END THE SUFFERING. I DO
NOT UNDERSTAND THIS DEATH-OF-THE-MIND. --The Light Fantastic

In message <fn8o3hhec6puc6bufd4ib6cid1t5s69ffp@4ax.com> Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:
> But now someone on Twitter has said that "scampered" is BrE only and
> will be annoying to Americans.

That person is wrong.

--
'I don't like to ask them questions.'
'Why not?'
'They might give me answers. And then what would I do?'

On Fri, 25 Mar 2022 22:41:48 -0400, Joy Beeson
<jbeeson@invalid.net.invalid> wrote:

>On Thu, 24 Mar 2022 09:56:49 +0200, Steve Hayes
><hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>
>> But now someone on Twitter has said that "scampered" is BrE only and
>> will be annoying to Americans.
>>
>That is astounding news to this American.
>
>I do associate it with small prey that frequently needs to scamper,
>and playful younglings, but that makes it all the more appropriate to
>describe the actions of a large predator escaping from a small bird.
>
>"Cantered" has a more liesurely sound to me: fast, but not panicky.
>But I encountered a horse only once in my life, about seventy years
>ago, and I hid in the haymow until it went away.

Aye, and "fast, but not panicky" is what I had in mind. The leopard
wants to get away from the bird that is harassing it, not because it
is terrified, but rather escaping from a nuisance than from a deadly
danger. It is distancing itself from what the bird is protecting.

--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk

On Fri, 25 Mar 2022 19:31:54 -0700
Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> wrote:

> On Fri, 25 Mar 2022 18:23:19 -0400, Rich Ulrich
> <rich.ulrich@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >On Thu, 24 Mar 2022 19:59:02 +1100, Peter Moylan
> ><peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >>On 24/03/22 18:56, Steve Hayes wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 22:00:57 +1100, Peter Moylan
> >>> <peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 22/03/22 21:22, Steve Hayes wrote:
> >>>>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 09:16:57 -0700, Ken Blake
> >>>>> <Ken@invalid.news.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> You must have a broader range of friends than I do. I've never
> >>>>>> known a horse.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> In which case you probably wouldn't know a canter from a marsh
> >>>>> wiggle.
> >>>>
> >>>> If you've been through the desert on a horse with no name, you
> >>>> probably know what a canter is even if you've never been introduced
> >>>> to the horse.
> >>>>
> >>>> (On the other hand, I did once ride a horse I hadn't been
> >>>> introduced to. It tried to throw me.)
> >>>
> >>> My reason for asking is that I wrote, of a leopard trying to escape
> >>> from a haraaing bird, that it "cantered down the hill".
> >>>
> >>> My wife queried it, and eventually, after much indeterminate and
> >>> inconsequential discussion here, I decided to change it to
> >>> "scampered".
> >>>
> >>> But now someone on Twitter has said that "scampered" is BrE only and
> >>> will be annoying to Americans.
> >>
> >>What about "ran" or "raced"?
> >
> >Has anyone suggested "scrambled"?
>
>
> I thought about suggesting it, but I decided that if I did, I might
> get egg on my face.
>
Bless you. (A Benedictine monk)

--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

On 26/03/2022 9:51 am, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Mar 2022 19:31:54 -0700
> Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 25 Mar 2022 18:23:19 -0400, Rich Ulrich
>> <rich.ulrich@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 24 Mar 2022 19:59:02 +1100, Peter Moylan
>>> <peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 24/03/22 18:56, Steve Hayes wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 22:00:57 +1100, Peter Moylan
>>>>> <peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 22/03/22 21:22, Steve Hayes wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 09:16:57 -0700, Ken Blake
>>>>>>> <Ken@invalid.news.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> You must have a broader range of friends than I do. I've never
>>>>>>>> known a horse.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In which case you probably wouldn't know a canter from a marsh
>>>>>>> wiggle.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you've been through the desert on a horse with no name, you
>>>>>> probably know what a canter is even if you've never been introduced
>>>>>> to the horse.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (On the other hand, I did once ride a horse I hadn't been
>>>>>> introduced to. It tried to throw me.)
>>>>>
>>>>> My reason for asking is that I wrote, of a leopard trying to escape
>>>>> from a haraaing bird, that it "cantered down the hill".
>>>>>
>>>>> My wife queried it, and eventually, after much indeterminate and
>>>>> inconsequential discussion here, I decided to change it to
>>>>> "scampered".
>>>>>
>>>>> But now someone on Twitter has said that "scampered" is BrE only and
>>>>> will be annoying to Americans.
>>>>
>>>> What about "ran" or "raced"?
>>>
>>> Has anyone suggested "scrambled"?
>>
>>
>> I thought about suggesting it, but I decided that if I did, I might
>> get egg on my face.
>>
> Bless you. (A Benedictine monk)

Shhhh!

--
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

J. J. Lodder submitted this gripping article, maybe on Friday:
> Kerr-Mudd, John <admin@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 11:49:25 -0000
>> Janet <nobody@hame.cock> wrote:
>>
>>> In article <20220322113719.e1d15568ad5a9b6d10833738@g{oogle}mail.com>,
>>> anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com says...
>>>>
>>>> I wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Perhaps you were on rather long terms with
>>>>
>>>> I noticed this, and in deafault of a suitable adjective (in
>>>> my ready memory), changed it to "not on familliar terms",
>>>> but forgot to re-run the updated message throgh Groff. What
>>>> adjective could be used in stead of "not familliar"?
>>>
>>> "Distant".
>>>
>>> I hope nobody here has had intercourse with horses, btw.
>>>
>> Neigh.
>
> There is Poisson statistics about those who may have tried,
>
> Jan

Tracking how far they flew? Or which field they are distributed in?

/dps "sounds fishy"

--
Who, me? And what lacuna?

Snidely pounded on thar keyboard to tell us
> J. J. Lodder submitted this gripping article, maybe on Friday:
>> Kerr-Mudd, John <admin@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>>> On or about Tue, 22 Mar 2022 11:49:25 -0000 (almost exactly)
>>> Janet <nobody@hame.cock> wrote:

>>>> I hope nobody here has had intercourse with horses, btw.
>>>>
>>> Neigh.
>>
>> There is Poisson statistics about those who may have tried,
>>
>> Jan
>
> Tracking how far they flew? Or which field they are distributed in?

Not exactly "borked", though.

/dps "and not absorbed by the Borg"

Bortkiewicz, 1898

--
"That's a good sort of hectic, innit?"

" Very much so, and I'd recommend the haggis wontons."
-njm

Snidely <snidely.too@gmail.com> wrote:

> J. J. Lodder submitted this gripping article, maybe on Friday:
> > Kerr-Mudd, John <admin@127.0.0.1> wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 11:49:25 -0000
> >> Janet <nobody@hame.cock> wrote:
> >>
> >>> In article <20220322113719.e1d15568ad5a9b6d10833738@g{oogle}mail.com>,
> >>> anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com says...
> >>>>
> >>>> I wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Perhaps you were on rather long terms with
> >>>>
> >>>> I noticed this, and in deafault of a suitable adjective (in
> >>>> my ready memory), changed it to "not on familliar terms",
> >>>> but forgot to re-run the updated message throgh Groff. What
> >>>> adjective could be used in stead of "not familliar"?
> >>>
> >>> "Distant".
> >>>
> >>> I hope nobody here has had intercourse with horses, btw.
> >>>
> >> Neigh.
> >
> > There is Poisson statistics about those who may have tried,
> >
> > Jan
>
> Tracking how far they flew? Or which field they are distributed in?

Heavenly, presumably,

Jan

On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 11:49:25 -0000, Janet <nobody@hame.cock> wrote:

> In article <20220322113719.e1d15568ad5a9b6d10833738@g{oogle}mail.com>,
> anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com says...
>>
>> I wrote:
>>
>> > Perhaps you were on rather long terms with
>>
>> I noticed this, and in deafault of a suitable adjective (in
>> my ready memory), changed it to "not on familliar terms",
>> but forgot to re-run the updated message throgh Groff. What
>> adjective could be used in stead of "not familliar"?
>
> "Distant".
>
> I hope nobody here has had intercourse with horses, btw.

I heard recently that in some prudish countries this is actually illegal. But if the horse consents by having a raging erection....

On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 02:04:55 -0000, Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:

> On 23/03/22 01:27, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
>> On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 11:49:25 -0000
>> Janet <nobody@hame.cock> wrote:
>>
>>> In article <20220322113719.e1d15568ad5a9b6d10833738@g{oogle}mail.com>,
>>> anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com says...
>>>>
>>>> I wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Perhaps you were on rather long terms with
>>>>
>>>> I noticed this, and in deafault of a suitable adjective (in
>>>> my ready memory), changed it to "not on familliar terms",
>>>> but forgot to re-run the updated message throgh Groff. What
>>>> adjective could be used in stead of "not familliar"?
>>>
>>> "Distant".
>>>
>>> I hope nobody here has had intercourse with horses, btw.
>>>
>> Neigh.
>
> Sheep are a more convenient height.

What do you call 4 sheep tied to a post in Wales?

On Mon, 14 Mar 2022 12:03:12 -0000, Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:

> Can animals other than horses canter or lope?
>
> Would it seem strange to read of a leopard cantering down a hill?
>
> I thought it was a gait that could be seen in many quadrupeds,
> especially those with fairly long legs -- going quite fast, but not in
> a great hurry.
>
> If you think it seems too strange, what other word would you use?

Cantaloupe, that covers everything, and you can eat it too.

Ken Blake to Anton Shepelev:

> > Horses, stupid? Tolstoy's "Strider" and Aitmatov's
> > "Farewell, Gulsary" portray them as very intelligent
> > creatures, and both the authors had intercourse with
> > horses throughout large part of their lives.
>
> They did? I thought that was illegal in Russia.

`intercourse' means communication. The unprovoked implica-
tion of a specific sexual or otherwise indecent meaning in
neutral words is an alarming tendency. The default meaning
should the most general one. Thus, English has already lost
`gay' and `making love'.

--
() ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail
/\ http://preview.tinyurl.com/qcy6mjc [archived]

On 28/03/22 21:52, Anton Shepelev wrote:
> Ken Blake to Anton Shepelev:
>
>>> Horses, stupid? Tolstoy's "Strider" and Aitmatov's
>>> "Farewell, Gulsary" portray them as very intelligent
>>> creatures, and both the authors had intercourse with horses
>>> throughout large part of their lives.
>>
>> They did? I thought that was illegal in Russia.
>
> `intercourse' means communication. The unprovoked implica- tion of
> a specific sexual or otherwise indecent meaning in neutral words is
> an alarming tendency. The default meaning should the most general
> one. Thus, English has already lost `gay' and `making love'.

Doesn't that happen in every language? I know about French "baiser", and
I have little doubt that similar examples can be found in other languages.

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

Peter Moylan to Anton Shepelev:

> > `intercourse' means communication. The unprovoked im-
> > plica- tion of a specific sexual or otherwise indecent
> > meaning in neutral words is an alarming tendency. The
> > default meaning should the most general one. Thus, En-
> > glish has already lost `gay' and `making love'.
>
> Doesn't that happen in every language?

I cannot say about every language, but it English is cer-
tainly not unique and has Russian as a comrade.

--
() ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail
/\ http://preview.tinyurl.com/qcy6mjc [archived]

On Mon, 28 Mar 2022 13:52:33 +0300, Anton Shepelev
<anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> wrote:

>Ken Blake to Anton Shepelev:
>
>> > Horses, stupid? Tolstoy's "Strider" and Aitmatov's
>> > "Farewell, Gulsary" portray them as very intelligent
>> > creatures, and both the authors had intercourse with
>> > horses throughout large part of their lives.
>>
>> They did? I thought that was illegal in Russia.
>
>`intercourse' means communication.

Yes, I know what it means,

>The unprovoked implica-
>tion of a specific sexual or otherwise indecent meaning in
>neutral words is an alarming tendency. The default meaning
>should the most general one. Thus, English has already lost
>`gay' and `making love'.

--
The real, original Ken Blake, not some other newcomer

On Mon, 28 Mar 2022 13:52:33 +0300, Anton Shepelev
<anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> wrote:

>Ken Blake to Anton Shepelev:
>
>> > Horses, stupid? Tolstoy's "Strider" and Aitmatov's
>> > "Farewell, Gulsary" portray them as very intelligent
>> > creatures, and both the authors had intercourse with
>> > horses throughout large part of their lives.
>>
>> They did? I thought that was illegal in Russia.
>
>`intercourse' means communication.

Yes, I know what it means.

>The unprovoked implica-
>tion

You say "unprovoked," but I wouldn't say that. It's become standard.
The great majority of English speakers would automatically treat
"intercourse" used by itself as you did in the sentence I quoted to
mean "sexual intercourse."

I know you didn't mean having sexual intercourse with horses. My
comment was simply meant as a mild joke.

>of a specific sexual or otherwise indecent meaning

"Sexual intercourse" has an indecent meaning to you? You must lead a
very sheltered life.

>in
>neutral words is an alarming tendency.

Alarming? Not to me. Like many English words, it's meaning changes
over time.

>The default meaning
>should the most general one. Thus, English has already lost
>`gay' and `making love'.

--
The real, original Ken Blake, not some other newcomer

On 2022-03-28 04:52, Anton Shepelev wrote:
> Ken Blake to Anton Shepelev:
>
>>> Horses, stupid? Tolstoy's "Strider" and Aitmatov's
>>> "Farewell, Gulsary" portray them as very intelligent
>>> creatures, and both the authors had intercourse with
>>> horses throughout large part of their lives.
>>
>> They did? I thought that was illegal in Russia.
>
> `intercourse' means communication. The unprovoked implica-
> tion of a specific sexual or otherwise indecent meaning in
> neutral words is an alarming tendency. The default meaning
> should the most general one. Thus, English has already lost
> `gay' and `making love'.

And is well on the way to losing him, her, she, he, niggardly, negro,
negroid, Eskimo, Karen, Snowflake, and probably a lot more.

On Mon, 28 Mar 2022 10:25:22 -0600, lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:

>On 2022-03-28 04:52, Anton Shepelev wrote:
>> Ken Blake to Anton Shepelev:
>>
>>>> Horses, stupid? Tolstoy's "Strider" and Aitmatov's
>>>> "Farewell, Gulsary" portray them as very intelligent
>>>> creatures, and both the authors had intercourse with
>>>> horses throughout large part of their lives.
>>>
>>> They did? I thought that was illegal in Russia.
>>
>> `intercourse' means communication. The unprovoked implica-
>> tion of a specific sexual or otherwise indecent meaning in
>> neutral words is an alarming tendency. The default meaning
>> should the most general one. Thus, English has already lost
>> `gay' and `making love'.
>
>And is well on the way to losing him, her, she, he, niggardly, negro,
>negroid, Eskimo,

Yes to all the above. Unfortunately, as far as I'm concerned.

> Karen, Snowflake,

Karen? Snowflake? Why?

>and probably a lot more.

Yes.

--
The real, original Ken Blake, not some other newcomer