|
Post by Sue M-V on Jun 18, 2008 12:00:06 GMT
I could of sworn there was two cream buns on a plate, but then, they just disappear! You beat me, Dave. The tense there is a bit iffy, too! Perhaps you shouldn't be in such a hurry, Vadim! Ah, the impetuosity of youth! When you're as old as we are ... Sue
|
|
|
Post by Vadim on Jun 18, 2008 13:20:55 GMT
I could of sworn there was two cream buns on a plate, but then, they just disappear! You beat me, Dave. The tense there is a bit iffy, too! Perhaps you shouldn't be in such a hurry, Vadim! Ah, the impetuosity of youth! When you're as old as we are ... Sue Or perhap, that IS the way I write. I may have joined a message board full of people with English Language skills that would put the OED to shame, but I am but a newbie. I do, however, apreciate all the comments on my usages ( ). Thanks once again to my two best freinds Dave and Sue!
|
|
|
Post by Gabriel-Ernest on Jun 18, 2008 13:20:57 GMT
But there again when you are as old as we are it is better to get it done sooner as they may not be a later! G-E.
|
|
|
Post by Sue M-V on Jun 18, 2008 21:51:07 GMT
Oh, well, G-E, we're not all as old as that!
Sue ;D
|
|
ianm
New Member
Posts: 20
|
Post by ianm on Jun 19, 2008 7:29:53 GMT
[...] a home-coked dinner.[...] Home-coked, home-cokery, home-coking ... are these euphemisms for incompetent barbecuing? Especially the good old-fashioned (pre-gas) way? I am reminded, I think from Fawlty Towers, but I'm not certain, of a home-coked (ie burnt) chicken as being 'vulcanised'. Also, seen recently in Tesco in Barrhead, some thoroughly burnt bread rolls for sale. They were described as "Well fired". I have been unable to ascertain whether the Tesco Marketing Manager is both witty and inventive, or well fired rolls really are part of the local cuisine.
|
|
|
Post by Twoddle on Jun 19, 2008 8:35:25 GMT
Ianm,
Pardon me for asking, but are you the same Ianm who used to post to the APS forum? If so, weren't you posting from New Zealand then (or is my dotage showing)?
|
|
|
Post by Sue M-V on Jun 19, 2008 12:55:04 GMT
(or is my dotage showing)? All right, G-E, I retract my last remark! You seem to be in good company! Sue
|
|
|
Post by Pete on Jun 19, 2008 13:52:03 GMT
[...] a home-coked dinner.[...] Home-coked, home-cokery, home-coking ... are these euphemisms for incompetent barbecuing? Especially the good old-fashioned (pre-gas) way? I am reminded, I think from Fawlty Towers, but I'm not certain, of a home-coked (ie burnt) chicken as being 'vulcanised'. Also, seen recently in Tesco in Barrhead, some thoroughly burnt bread rolls for sale. They were described as "Well fired". I have been unable to ascertain whether the Tesco Marketing Manager is both witty and inventive, or well fired rolls really are part of the local cuisine. Was the baker also well fired?
|
|
|
Post by Barry on Jun 19, 2008 16:50:23 GMT
I think, Ianm, that 'home-cooked' simply refers to meals cooked in the kitchen, probably from scratch. In these days of convenience foods and take-aways, it's a term that has sharpened its meaning somewhat!
|
|
|
Post by Dave M on Jun 19, 2008 17:26:05 GMT
Surely Ianm understands that - it's coke (as in crumbly dry coal) that he's referring to
|
|
|
Post by Dr Mildr on Jun 19, 2008 18:38:45 GMT
Aha! That "miss not" construction! I have tried and failed to explain to my other half that, for example, I miss HAVING a tent; I can't miss NOT HAVING a tent, because I do in fact currently not have one! Is this a similar concept to my oft heard - aha, I've found the missing full stop. (The syntax I write won't run unless it has a a full stop at the end of each line.) I always wonder (aloud usually!) if one can find a missing full stop when it wasn't there in the first place. Or am I going madder than usual. Blame pressure of work (and missing terminal full stops!).
|
|
|
Post by Paul Doherty on Jun 19, 2008 19:41:21 GMT
So, Graham said: Do you miss not having a weekly thread on the pluralization of CD's? and the assertion is that this means Do you miss having a weekly thread on the pluralization of CD's? -- is that right?
I think I'd have said the same as Graham. It is often alleged we don't use a double negative in standard English (usually when someone says I ain't done nothing), but many books remark that, actually, we do.
It's like double bluff, isn't it? People say that when they just mean it was a bluff.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Doherty on Jun 19, 2008 19:42:51 GMT
It's like double bluff, isn't it? People say that when they just mean it was a bluff. A good example is here.
|
|
|
Post by Tone on Jun 19, 2008 20:47:12 GMT
> it's coke (as in crumbly dry coal)<
Surely (technically) coke, although it may have been made from coal, just ain't coal no more. It's almost pure carbon, all the other factions that make coal coal having been driven (burned) off during the coking process. You would have great difficulty smelting iron ore if you chucked coal into the melt instead of the desired coke.
Tone
|
|
|
Post by Dave M on Jun 20, 2008 7:59:33 GMT
Hi, Paul
I think you're right that double bluff is often misused, and is so in the example passage you quoted: a double bluff would be one where, for example, the allies made clear that Normandy was the intended site, expected the foe to work out that that was a bluff, and then DID use Normandy as the site!
The"miss not" structure, though, is one that flumoxes me: I really did read first read Graham to ask whether we were happy now that we were penalised with a weekly thread on the pluralisation of CDs.
|
|