>Headline in press release today: "Boise Cascade Says Bottom Behind It".
>
>But you couldn't say "... Behind Bottom It".
In alt.usage.english, R H Draney wrote:
>sage filted:
>>Headline in press release today: "Boise Cascade Says Bottom Behind It".
>>
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>"hind")..."bottom" can't function as a preposition, although it can be a verb
>(which is irrelevant in this headline)....r
Am I alone in having found that headline - and the comments - totally
and alarmingly unintelligible? Google eventually came to the rescue.
Boise Cascade isn't a distant cousin of Blanche DuBois, it is an it.
Specifically, it is a company that had a bad 2003 but expects to have a
good 2004.
http://www.thestreet.com/markets/meredithderby/10138737.html
By coincidence, I encountered another unfathomable bottom quote today.
In 1919, Marshall Foch asked: 'Who do the British have such sad faces
and such cheerful bottoms?'
I know it's a genuine quote (it's a side-bar for a puff of _History in
Quotations_) but I don't know the context, although the Versailles
Conference seems likely.
Anyone know anything about it?

Signature
Mickwick
Mickwick - 23 Jan 2004 23:38 GMT
In alt.usage.english, Mickwick wrote:
>'Who do the British have such sad faces and such cheerful bottoms?'
Foch: '*Why* do the British have such sad faces and such cheerful
bottoms?'

Signature
Mickwick
Charles Riggs - 24 Jan 2004 08:04 GMT
>In alt.usage.english, Mickwick wrote:
>
>>'Who do the British have such sad faces and such cheerful bottoms?'
>
>Foch: '*Why* do the British have such sad faces and such cheerful
>bottoms?'
Because their notorious teeth-care specialists have never worked on
their bottoms?

Signature
Charles Riggs
Email address: chriggs¦at¦eircom¦dot¦net
Mickwick - 24 Jan 2004 11:10 GMT
In alt.usage.english, Charles Riggs wrote:
>On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 23:38:27 +0000, Mickwick <mickwick@use.reply.to>
>>Foch: '*Why* do the British have such sad faces and such cheerful
>>bottoms?'
>
>Because their notorious teeth-care specialists have never worked on
>their bottoms?
Is that the secret then? American dentists work sitting down? And I
always thought it was just a question of money.

Signature
Mickwick
Evan Kirshenbaum - 24 Jan 2004 22:39 GMT
> In alt.usage.english, Charles Riggs wrote:
> >On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 23:38:27 +0000, Mickwick <mickwick@use.reply.to>
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> Is that the secret then? American dentists work sitting down? And I
> always thought it was just a question of money.
British dentists can't afford stools?

Signature
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |"It makes you wonder if there is
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |anything to astrology after all."
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |
|"Oh, there is," said Susan.
kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com |"Delusion, wishful thinking and
(650)857-7572 |gullibility."
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/
Mickwick - 26 Jan 2004 11:41 GMT
In alt.usage.english, Evan Kirshenbaum wrote:
>British dentists can't afford stools?
They can afford sunglasses. They hand them out so you (a) aren't blinded
by the ceiling lights and (b) have somewhere to hide while strangers
stare at you from three inches away. They should hand them out at the
barber's too. An excellent innovation.
Even so, spit-suckers - who are always shapely young women - shouldn't
be allowed to wear tight spotlessly white cotton lab-coats. Or perfume.
Not even sunglasses can prevent a certain amount of shiftiness when a
perfumed young bosom blocks half your view every few seconds.

Signature
Mickwick
Charles Riggs - 25 Jan 2004 03:56 GMT
>In alt.usage.english, Charles Riggs wrote:
>>On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 23:38:27 +0000, Mickwick <mickwick@use.reply.to>
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>Is that the secret then? American dentists work sitting down? And I
>always thought it was just a question of money.
The straight line was intentional. Glad to be of assistance.

Signature
Charles Riggs
Email address: chriggs¦at¦eircom¦dot¦net
Mickwick - 26 Jan 2004 11:41 GMT
In alt.usage.english, Charles Riggs wrote:
>The straight line was intentional. Glad to be of assistance.
Buttress your gladness with my gratitude.
(Why do the Irish have such cheerful faces and such sad bottoms?)

Signature
Mickwick
Charles Riggs - 27 Jan 2004 08:55 GMT
>In alt.usage.english, Charles Riggs wrote:
>
>>The straight line was intentional. Glad to be of assistance.
>
>Buttress your gladness with my gratitude.
Done and done.
>(Why do the Irish have such cheerful faces and such sad bottoms?)
Why do I get that 'deja vu all over again' feeling at least three
times a day?
Charles, who knows accents some of the time, but knows some
newsreaders don't know them any of the time. Newsreader = a computer
program only, I think we've agreed, Skitt.

Signature
Charles Riggs
Email address: chriggs¦at¦eircom¦dot¦net
Jonathan Miller - 24 Jan 2004 03:48 GMT
> In alt.usage.english, R H Draney wrote:
> >sage filted:
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> Am I alone in having found that headline - and the comments - totally
> and alarmingly unintelligible?
I'd say it's pretty standard financial jargon. The headline writer was (I
assume) playing with words because Boise Cascade manufactures Northern
toilet tissue. The fact that s/he couldn't do better says something.
Fortunately, it's not important to our survival.
Jon Miller
Mickwick - 24 Jan 2004 11:16 GMT
In alt.usage.english, Jonathan Miller wrote:
>I'd say it's pretty standard financial jargon. The headline writer was (I
>assume) playing with words because Boise Cascade manufactures Northern
>toilet tissue. The fact that s/he couldn't do better says something.
>Fortunately, it's not important to our survival.
'Boise Cascade: Flush After Wiping Deficit'?

Signature
Mickwick