 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / English Usage / October 2008Survival of weights
Hello All! In my British youth I remember that, if asked, I might have given my weight as, say, "9 stone 12" for 138 lb. I believe that Imperial weights are no longer official in British commerce but have people given up pound weights for personal statistics and, if not, would the "stone" method still be used?  SignatureJames Silverton Potomac, Maryland Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not On 28 Oct 2008, James Silverton wrote > Hello All! > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > have people given up pound weights for personal statistics and, > if not, would the "stone" method still be used? Personal weight is still measured in stones by everyone I know. (Doctors measure it kilos, but then translate it into stones so the patient -- and often the doctor -- knows what they're talking about.) SignatureCheers, Harvey CanEng and BrEng, indiscriminately mixed > On 28 Oct 2008, James Silverton wrote > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Personal weight is still measured in stones Yes, but my experience confirms the way James put it in his original question: "stone" rather than "stones". > by everyone I know. > > (Doctors measure it kilos, but then translate it into stones so the > patient -- and often the doctor -- knows what they're talking about.) Or in my wife's case as a way of mystifying the patient. When our daughter was born in a Birmingham hospital she knew exactly what the weight in kg meant but had no idea what the weight in lb meant. It's like the habit that is still quite strong in France of "helpfully" converting prices in euros to old francs. Signatureathel On 28 Oct 2008, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote >> On 28 Oct 2008, James Silverton wrote >> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Yes, but my experience confirms the way James put it in his > original question: "stone" rather than "stones". James and I used the word in different senses, though -- he was describing a weight, while I was describing the measure itself. "Do you think in stones for your weight?" "Yes, I do -- I'm 10 stone 2". Wording the first question as "Do you think in stone for your weight?" isn't impossible, but it sounds fairly odd to my ear. (It's the same for height, of course: "What's your height in feet?" "I'm 5 foot 7".) SignatureCheers, Harvey CanEng and BrEng, indiscriminately mixed > On 28 Oct 2008, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > Wording the first question as "Do you think in stone for your > weight?" isn't impossible, but it sounds fairly odd to my ear. Not to mine. > (It's the same for height, of course: "What's your height in > feet?" "I'm 5 foot 7".) Yes, but I'm not sure it's same: I would certainly say "The width of my office is 10 feet", but I'd also say "Dave Hatunen's weight was 15 stone". Signatureathel Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote, in <6mqqtvFi5mtbU1@mid.individual.net> on Wed, 29 Oct 2008 11:06:55 +0100: > > On 28 Oct 2008, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote > > [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > office is 10 feet", but I'd also say "Dave Hatunen's weight was 15 > stone". It's the 7 inches that makes it 'foot'. SignatureNick Spalding BrE/IrE On 29 Oct 2008, Nick Spalding wrote > Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote, in > <6mqqtvFi5mtbU1@mid.individual.net> [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > > It's the 7 inches that makes it 'foot'. Yes, indeed; and certainly no-one's disputing that "Dave's weight was 15 stone" or "Dave weighs 15 stone" is normal. I'm still fairly certain, though, that I've heard the plural more often when the measurement is being discussed -- and a quick google turns up a lot more hits for "stones or kilos" than it does for "stone or kilos". SignatureCheers, Harvey CanEng and BrEng, indiscriminately mixed HVS wrote on Wed, 29 Oct 2008 11:10:41 GMT: >> Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote, in >> <6mqqtvFi5mtbU1@mid.individual.net> [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] >> >> It's the 7 inches that makes it 'foot'. > Yes, indeed; and certainly no-one's disputing that "Dave's > weight was 15 stone" or "Dave weighs 15 stone" is normal. > I'm still fairly certain, though, that I've heard the plural > more often when the measurement is being discussed -- and a > quick google turns up a lot more hits for "stones or kilos" moths > months> than it does for "stone or kilos". It is interesting that the singular term is used in e.g.. "10 stone 12" but not as often in "5 foot 10", where I have heard, and used, "5 feet 10" . When the British used shillings I seem to remember both "5 pound 10" and "5 pounds 10". Can anyone recall other measures where the name of the second unit is omitted? The usage does not seem to extend to age and I think I might say "74 years 5 months" if I felt the need for precision. SignatureJames Silverton Potomac, Maryland Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not >Can anyone recall other measures where the name of the second unit is >omitted? The usage does not seem to extend to age and I think I might >say "74 years 5 months" if I felt the need for precision. I may do something at 9:10 this morning. That's ten minutes past nine o'clock if you don't know what the "10" stands for. SignatureTony Cooper - Orlando, Florida tony cooper filted: >>Can anyone recall other measures where the name of the second unit is >>omitted? The usage does not seem to extend to age and I think I might >>say "74 years 5 months" if I felt the need for precision. > >I may do something at 9:10 this morning. That's ten minutes past nine >o'clock if you don't know what the "10" stands for. When I'm putting together a collection of sound clips, I'll often refer to one that runs "a minute twenty"...the word "minute" drops out if there's more than one of them....r SignatureLittle-known fact: About 2% of the famous quotations credited to "Anonymous" were actually originated by Jasper D Anonymous, a 14th-century maker of carriage wheels. >Can anyone recall other measures where the name of the second unit is >omitted? The usage does not seem to extend to age and I think I might >say "74 years 5 months" if I felt the need for precision. How about prices? A: "How much is that?" B: "23 99" (twenty three ninety nine) where 23 is in dollars/pounds/euro/other-currency-unit and 99 is in whatever the currency unit is divided into: cents/pence. SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) Peter wrote on Wed, 29 Oct 2008 13:26:00 +0000: >> Can anyone recall other measures where the name of the second >> unit is omitted? The usage does not seem to extend to age and >> I think I might say "74 years 5 months" if I felt the need >> for precision. > How about prices? > A: "How much is that?" > B: "23 99" (twenty three ninety nine) > where 23 is in dollars/pounds/euro/other-currency-unit and 99 > is in whatever the currency unit is divided into: cents/pence. Yes, no units at all. Why didn't I think of that? If someone asked me the price of gas at my local station I might say "3 75" ("three seventyfive") without "dollars" or "per gallon." To be honest, I did see that price yesterday but the pirates running the gas stations in Potomac village are more lkely to be charging "four fifteen". SignatureJames Silverton Potomac, Maryland Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not > Yes, no units at all. Why didn't I think of that? If someone asked me > the price of gas at my local station I might say "3 75" ("three [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > gas stations in Potomac village are more lkely to be charging "four > fifteen". You've got to be kidding. It's less than $3 for premium in Virginia. Down near Farmville last weekend I paid $2.72 for 93 octane. SignatureJohn Varela Trade NEW lamps for OLD for email. John wrote on Wed, 29 Oct 2008 20:45:04 -0400: >> Yes, no units at all. Why didn't I think of that? If someone >> asked me the price of gas at my local station I might say "3 [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >> running the gas stations in Potomac village are more lkely to >> be charging "four fifteen". > You've got to be kidding. It's less than $3 for premium in > Virginia. Down near Farmville last weekend I paid $2.72 for > 93 octane. Exaggerating of course! From a bit less than three to a bit more is about right tho' the Pirates of Potomac are flourishing. SignatureJames Silverton Potomac, Maryland Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not > John wrote on Wed, 29 Oct 2008 20:45:04 -0400: > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >Exaggerating of course! From a bit less than three to a bit more is >about right tho' the Pirates of Potomac are flourishing. Your pirates are letting you off easy, compared to the European pirates: http://www.aaroadwatch.ie/eupetrolprices/ The euro was worth $1.26 a day or two ago. SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs Near Dublin, Ireland James Silverton: >> Can anyone recall other measures where the name of the second unit is >> omitted? The usage does not seem to extend to age and I think I might >> say "74 years 5 months" if I felt the need for precision. Peter Duncanson: > How about prices? > > A: "How much is that?" > B: "23 99" (twenty three ninety nine) But that's not the same -- there are *no* units stated. British people might say "twenty-three dollars ninety-nine"; North Americans wouldn't (except if the price was strictly between $1 and $2, in which case we might say "a dollar" followed by the number of cents, instead of "one" followed by the cents). SignatureMark Brader, Short words good; sesquipedalian verbalizations undesirable Toronto, msb@vex.net -- after George Orwell My text in this article is in the public domain. Mark Brader filted: >James Silverton: > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >$1 and $2, in which case we might say "a dollar" followed by the >number of cents, instead of "one" followed by the cents). Back in the late 1960s, Polaroid came up with a camera called the Swinger and included its retail price in the jingle for its television commercial: "It's more than a camera; It's almost alive. It's only nineteen dollars And ninety-five." The catchiness of the accompanying tune effectively precluded any store from selling them at a higher or lower price...even then I wondered what they'd do when inflation eventually forced them to raise the price....r SignatureLittle-known fact: About 2% of the famous quotations credited to "Anonymous" were actually originated by Jasper D Anonymous, a 14th-century maker of carriage wheels. > Mark Brader filted: >> James Silverton: [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > selling them at a higher or lower price...even then I wondered what they'd do > when inflation eventually forced them to raise the price....r Oh dear, that's reminded me of "1001 cleans a big, big carpet/For less than half a crown", which is a sticker... SignatureLaura (emulate St. George for email) [...] > Oh dear, that's reminded me of "1001 cleans a big, big carpet/For less > than half a crown", which is a sticker... Never mind: here's one without an associated jingle--perhaps that's why this weight didn't survive. Back in the dream-time, when "cork-tipped" meant they didn't stick to your lip, but not that there was a wad of cellulose between the user and the baccy, there used to be small cigarettes called "Player's Weights". Why they were called that only became a little clearer when I found "Harrods Weights" in my parents' mail-order catalogue: you really did buy these by weight, not by count. But John Player of Nottingham (Hi, Robin!) sold his in packets of the usual ten and twenty. Did Player originally sell them by weight, and finally yield to conformity? SignatureMike. >[...] >> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >usual ten and twenty. Did Player originally sell them by weight, and >finally yield to conformity? Apparently so. <q> Players Weights was the ‘Players’ brand competing head to head with the ‘Wills’ brand Woodbine, whilst the larger cigarettes ‘Players’ and ‘Senior Service’ competed at the other end. Weights were first manufactured in the 1800’s by John Player and Son in Nottingham, and were available in 10’s, 15’s and 20’s (and probably 5’s too) they came in plain or cork tipped variety. They were originally known as Players No 1 but by the turn of the century they became known as ‘Weights’ because they were sold by weight and not by count. </q> http://www.oxforddiecast.co.uk/CIG071%20Players%20Weights.htm My father smoked Woodbines. SignatureRobin (BrE) Herts, England >> [...] >>> [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > My father smoked Woodbines. My old supervisor watched with pleasure as the Master was given a Woodbine after a dinner. Lighting up and inhaling deeply, he managed to gasp out, "My God! That's not a cigarette: it's a tracheotomy!" Were they not officially named "Wild Woodbines"? Since "woodbine" is another name for honeysuckle, it's hard to avoid suspecting a degree of misrepresentation. There was a period when they also sold "Export Woodbines", which were bigger. But Woodbine-Weights etc size was standard for Australian cigarettes: ISTR that Aus Rothman's king size were the same length as ordinary Brit fags. There was at least one other flower name for British tobacco, once upon a time: I remember seeing an old sign advertising "Nosegay". And at about the time they were inventing non-smokers, tobacconists' shops were almost as good a source of found poetry as a British Railways timetable. Sweet Afton (Irish, and very strong) Passing Clouds Three Castles Abdullah Sullivan Powell, etc. The pipe tobaccos didn't by any means all stick to the nautical "Navy Cut" etc motif: Digger Erinmore Condor Sherpa Afrikander (so spelt) Four Square (each variety identified by the colour of the four squares on the tin) Royal Yacht Baby's Bottom Sobranie of various types, etc. An honorary uncle explained why Wilson's SP No 1 snuff was so called (I still have a little rusting tin of his in the back of a drawer, and can't bear to throw it away). Apparently it was originally made from tobacco from a captured Spanish ship, and the initials stood for "Spanish Prize"--they should have kept the full expression for the romance of it. SignatureMike. >Mark Brader filted: >> [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >selling them at a higher or lower price...even then I wondered what they'd do >when inflation eventually forced them to raise the price....r They could manufacture and sell the Swinger II. SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs Near Dublin, Ireland >>Mark Brader filted: >>> [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > >They could manufacture and sell the Swinger II. Unfortunately, Polaroid no longer makes cameras at all. Signature************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * Hatunen filted: >>>Back in the late 1960s, Polaroid came up with a camera called the Swinger and >>>included its retail price in the jingle for its television commercial: [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > >Unfortunately, Polaroid no longer makes cameras at all. Land's sake!...r Signature"Governor Palin, I served with Dan Quayle. I knew Dan Quayle; Dan Quayle was a friend of mine. Governor Palin, you're no Dan Quayle." > It is interesting that the singular term is used in e.g.. "10 stone 12" > but not as often in "5 foot 10", where I have heard, and used, "5 feet > 10" . Five foot two, eyes of blue, But Oh! what those five foot could do. Has anybody seen my gal? SignatureJohn Varela Trade NEW lamps for OLD for email. >On Wed, 29 Oct 2008 08:29:10 -0400, James Silverton wrote >(in article <ge9kum$bbk$1@registered.motzarella.org>): [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >But Oh! what those five foot could do. > Has anybody seen my gal? Tricky. Shouldn't it be "Oh! What those five foot two could do," and not leave two inches out in the cold? Unless it's "Five foot; two eyes of blue". In which case I'm speaking of my sweetie pie, only sixty inches high. SignaturePaul Paul Wolff filted: >>On Wed, 29 Oct 2008 08:29:10 -0400, James Silverton wrote >>(in article <ge9kum$bbk$1@registered.motzarella.org>): [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > >In which case I'm speaking of my sweetie pie, only sixty inches high. Last night I met a man from Mars, and he was very sad. He said, "Won't you help me find my girl friend, please?" So I asked him, "What does she look like?", And the man from Mars said, she's.... Eight foot two, solid blue, Five transistors in each shoe, Has anybody seen my gal? Lucite nose, rust-proof toes, And when her antenna glows, She's the cutest Martian gal. You know she promised me, Recently, She wouldn't stray, But came the dawn, She was gone Eighteen billion miles away. Her steering wheel has sex appeal, Her evening gown is stainless steel, Has anybody seen my gal? How I miss all the bliss Of her sweet hydraulic kiss, Has anybody seen my gal? Lovely shape, custom built, Squeeze her wrong and she says "tilt", Has anybody seen my gal? She does the cutest tricks, With her six Stereo ears. When she walks by, Spacemen cry, 'Specially when she shifts her gears. If she's found, rush like mad, Put her on a launching pad, Down at Cape Canaveral, And shoot me back my cutie, My supersonic beauty, Send me back my Martian gal! - Allan Sherman ....r SignatureLittle-known fact: About 2% of the famous quotations credited to "Anonymous" were actually originated by Jasper D Anonymous, a 14th-century maker of carriage wheels. >Paul Wolff filted: >> [quoted text clipped - 62 lines] > >....r I wonder if there is a double entendre in "Specially when she shifts her gears". SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs Near Dublin, Ireland > Can anyone recall other measures where the name of the second unit > is omitted? The usage does not seem to extend to age and I think I > might say "74 years 5 months" if I felt the need for precision. It's routinely omitted for cents when the number of dollars is one, e.g., "a dollar ninety-five". When it's more than two dollars, the "dollars". With non-round amounts more than two dollars, typically either both units are omitted ("two ninety-five") or neither is ("two dollars and ninety-five cents"). SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |A specification which calls for 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |network-wide use of encryption, but Palo Alto, CA 94304 |invokes the Tooth Fairy to handle |key distribution, is a useless kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com |farce. (650)857-7572 | Henry Spencer http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ > Hello All! > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > pound weights for personal statistics and, if not, would the "stone" > method still be used? My more recent experience among them is that Brits have no idea of what a body weight such as 138 lbs means without dividing by 14 in their head. Bathroom scales still read in stn (and maybe kg). A more authoritative answer or three will doubtless be along presently. SignatureRoland Hutchinson Will play viola da gamba for food. NB mail to my.spamtrap [at] verizon.net is heavily filtered to remove spam. If your message looks like spam I may not see it. >> Hello All! >> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > >A more authoritative answer or three will doubtless be along presently. While visiting a friends in England once the wife asked me how much I weighed. I replied "205 pounds". She turned to her husband and asked him how much that was in stone. Signature************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * >>> Hello All! >>> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > much I weighed. I replied "205 pounds". She turned to her husband > and asked him how much that was in stone. Unsurprising. I neglected to mention that they don't get much practice dividing by 14 in their head (since scales read directly in stn), so they aren't any better at it than we would be. SignatureRoland Hutchinson Will play viola da gamba for food. NB mail to my.spamtrap [at] verizon.net is heavily filtered to remove spam. If your message looks like spam I may not see it. >>>> Hello All! >>>> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >Unsurprising. I neglected to mention that they don't get much practice >dividing by 14 in their head (since scales read directly in stn), This (mechanical) one for example -- 0 to 20st 5lbs (0 to 130Kg): http://www.argos.co.uk/wcsstore/argos/images/108-8300898aA67UC321826X.jpg Most scales are now electronic with LCD readouts. > so they >aren't any better at it than we would be. SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) >Hatunen wrote: >>>> [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >dividing by 14 in their head (since scales read directly in stn), so they >aren't any better at it than we would be. But some of us can still remember our seven times table up to three and see that 205 is only a little less than 210, and 210 is to 140 as 21 is to 14 so there's a factor of one-and-a-half times ten in there, and it follows, as the night the day, that Dave Hatunen must be a smigeon [spell-checker objects] under fifteen stone. Job done. SignaturePaul >>Hatunen wrote: >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > follows, as the night the day, that Dave Hatunen must be a smigeon > [spell-checker objects] under fifteen stone. Job done. Right. In other words, an American who knows his/her multiplication facts can do it just as readily -- which was my point, I think. Says here there's a "d" in "smidgeon", by the way. If I weren't bone-idle lazy (and at the end of a long day), I'd exercise my gumption and look up whether it is in fact an augmentative of "smidge". (Hm, spellchucker doesn't seem to like "augmentative" -- nor "smidge" -- nor "hm" [with any number of m's] -- nor, of course "spellchucker".) SignatureRoland Hutchinson Will play viola da gamba for food. NB mail to my.spamtrap [at] verizon.net is heavily filtered to remove spam. If your message looks like spam I may not see it. > Says here there's a "d" in "smidgeon", by the way. The word is "smidgen", no O. SignatureJohn Varela Trade NEW lamps for OLD for email. >> Says here there's a "d" in "smidgeon", by the way. > >The word is "smidgen", no O. From the COD10: "smidgen (also smidgeon or smidgin)" SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs Near Dublin, Ireland >>Hatunen wrote: >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] >follows, as the night the day, that Dave Hatunen must be a smigeon >[spell-checker objects] under fifteen stone. Job done. Nah. 196 is 14 squared, so 205 is 14 stone 9. Trivial. Cheers - Ian >>>> Hello All! >>>> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >> much I weighed. I replied "205 pounds". She turned to her husband >> and asked him how much that was in stone. > Unsurprising. I neglected to mention that they don't get much practice > dividing by 14 in their head (since scales read directly in stn), so they > aren't any better at it than we would be. There's no need to divide by 14. It's easy enough to do the simple multiples that 10 stones are 140 lbs, 15 stones 210 lbs, and then do the rest by addition and subtraction rather than division. SignatureChris Malcolm >>> Hello All! >>> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > While visiting a friends in England once the wife asked me how > much I weighed. That wasn't very polite of her. > I replied "205 pounds". She turned to her husband > and asked him how much that was in stone. Signatureathel Athel Cornish-Bowden filted: >> While visiting a friends in England once the wife asked me how >> much I weighed. > >That wasn't very polite of her. Guess she needed to know if the harness was strong enough....r SignatureLittle-known fact: About 2% of the famous quotations credited to "Anonymous" were actually originated by Jasper D Anonymous, a 14th-century maker of carriage wheels. >Athel Cornish-Bowden filted: >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Guess she needed to know if the harness was strong enough....r As long as the whip was resilient enough, it wouldn't matter. SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs Near Dublin, Ireland > My more recent experience among them is that Brits have no idea of what a > body weight such as 138 lbs means without dividing by 14 in their head. > Bathroom scales still read in stn (and maybe kg). I would have to agree with that. I know my weight in stones and in kilograms and can understand other people's weights expressed in either way, but a weight in pounds is like a foreign language unless it's very close to 112 lb. SignatureRob Bannister >> My more recent experience among them is that Brits have no idea of what a >> body weight such as 138 lbs means without dividing by 14 in their head. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > way, but a weight in pounds is like a foreign language unless it's very > close to 112 lb. Whereas I (as expected of an American) have to convert both stones and kg to pounds to understand how much someone weighs. SignatureRoland Hutchinson Will play viola da gamba for food. NB mail to my.spamtrap [at] verizon.net is heavily filtered to remove spam. If your message looks like spam I may not see it. >>> My more recent experience among them is that Brits have no idea of what >>> a body weight such as 138 lbs means without dividing by 14 in their [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Whereas I (as expected of an American) have to convert both stones and kg > to pounds to understand how much someone weighs. ...and, thankfully it is easier to multiply (by 14 or 2.2 as the case may warrant) than to divide. SignatureRoland Hutchinson Will play viola da gamba for food. NB mail to my.spamtrap [at] verizon.net is heavily filtered to remove spam. If your message looks like spam I may not see it. >>> My more recent experience among them is that Brits have no idea of what a >>> body weight such as 138 lbs means without dividing by 14 in their head. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Whereas I (as expected of an American) have to convert both stones and kg to > pounds to understand how much someone weighs. Which just goes to show that measuring in 10s or 12s or 14s or even 17s does not make things any easier at all -- it's all what you're used to. SignatureRob Bannister In alt.usage.english, James Silverton wrote: >In my British youth I remember that, if asked, I might have given my >weight as, say, "9 stone 12" for 138 lb. I believe that Imperial >weights are no longer official in British commerce but have people >given up pound weights for personal statistics and, if not, would the >"stone" method still be used? AFAIK stones and pounds are still normal for body weight, though children might relate to kg. I'm unusual in that I went metric long before I started taking any notice of my weight, so I have only the vaguest idea of what it is in stones and pounds (somewhere in the 12-15 stone region). SignatureMike Barnes Cheshire, England > In alt.usage.english, James Silverton wrote: >> In my British youth I remember that, if asked, I might have given my [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > vaguest idea of what it is in stones and pounds (somewhere in the > 12-15 stone region). For comparison, in Australia the only weights for which imperial units are still commonly quoted are for babies, and they don't come big enough to require stones. I haven't heard stones used for a long time, and I doubt many younger people would even know what they were. SignatureRegards John for mail: my initials plus a u e at tpg dot com dot au >> In alt.usage.english, James Silverton wrote: >>> In my British youth I remember that, if asked, I might have given my [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > are still commonly quoted are for babies, and they don't come big > enough to require stones... It's coming. When our daughters were born the standard size was 7 lb, but I've read that in UK (and doubtless elsewhere) it's become quite common for newborn babies to reach 10 or 11 lb. athel >Hello All! > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >pound weights for personal statistics and, if not, would the "stone" >method still be used? No and yes. Some medical outfits have gone metric, so when I was pregnant I was weighed alternately by my GP in stones and pounds and by the hospital clinic in Kg. Neither appeared to have conversion tables, so they didn't know whether I'd gone up or down. I was amused to note that my son's Nintendo Wii Fit (presumably the UK edition) asked for my weight in stones and pounds (without the option). Katy >> Hello All! >> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > I was amused to note that my son's Nintendo Wii Fit (presumably the UK edition) > asked for my weight in stones and pounds (without the option). That's odd. My Wii Fit weighed me itself. It asked for my height in feet and inches, though. SignatureLaura (emulate St. George for email) >> Hello All! >> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > I was amused to note that my son's Nintendo Wii Fit (presumably the UK edition) > asked for my weight in stones and pounds (without the option). I'd have thought that was the kind of thing a Wii Fit should be able to do for itself (and Laura's apparently can). I've never been on one myself, but I've seen them being used in airports. Signatureathel >> I was amused to note that my son's Nintendo Wii Fit (presumably the >> UK edition) asked for my weight in stones and pounds (without the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > to do for itself (and Laura's apparently can). I've never been on one > myself, but I've seen them being used in airports. Mine asked only for height (ft & in) and age. It told me my weight (in both kg and stones) and my BMI. SignatureRay UK >> I was amused to note that my son's Nintendo Wii Fit (presumably the UK edition) >> asked for my weight in stones and pounds (without the option). > >I'd have thought that was the kind of thing a Wii Fit should be able to >do for itself (and Laura's apparently can). I've never been on one >myself, but I've seen them being used in airports. Yes, my error. It asked for my height in feet and inches. Katy > Hello All! > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > given up pound weights for personal statistics and, if not, would the > "stone" method still be used? In the last few days they've taken a backward step as far as retail trade is concerned. Traders will no longer be prosecuted for selling stuff in pounds and ounces. The more moronic British newspapers called those who refused to comply with the international system "metric martyrs", and the government has predictably, though after a long time, caved in to the pressure with its usual craven gutlessness. (I'm fond of the medieval units, but fair and honest trading demands that there should be a single system.) SignatureMike. In alt.usage.english, Mike Lyle wrote: >> Hello All! >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >trade is concerned. Traders will no longer be prosecuted for selling >stuff in pounds and ounces. <cough> Traders can't be prosecuted for selling stuff in pounds and ounces. However they can be prosecuted for refusing to sell stuff in the approved metric measures. >The more moronic British newspapers called >those who refused to comply with the international system "metric >martyrs", and the government has predictably, though after a long time, >caved in to the pressure with its usual craven gutlessness. So it seems. Though they've merely issued guidelines regarding prosecutions for minor offences. I wouldn't regard deliberate and persistent flouting of consumer protection law as a minor offence. SignatureMike Barnes Cheshire, England > In alt.usage.english, Mike Lyle wrote: >>> Hello All! [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > However they can be prosecuted for refusing to sell stuff in the > approved metric measures. Yes. My fumble. Sorry. >> The more moronic British newspapers called >> those who refused to comply with the international system "metric [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > prosecutions for minor offences. I wouldn't regard deliberate and > persistent flouting of consumer protection law as a minor offence. Indeed. I seem to recall that God himself went on about it in some detail in the Bible. Maybe that's why he had it in for the Amalekites: they could have been flogging stuff in non-standard units. SignatureMike. >> Hello All! >> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >the medieval units, but fair and honest trading demands that there >should be a single system.) We have a live one: http://www.metricmartyrs.co.uk/ After very careful consideration 64 year-old Hackney Market trader Janet Devers has decided to lodge an appeal to have her criminal record quashed following the Government's announcement that councils will effectively be barred from prosecuting traders for using imperial measures. Metric Martyr Janet Devers and Neil Herron of the Metric Martyrs Campaign will lodge the appeal papers at Thames Magistrates Court at 12.30pm Monday 27th October 2008. Janet Dever's appeal will provide an early test of the Government's new stance which came after she was convicted on eight charges earlier this month. Her case is believed to have prompted the climbdown announced by John Denham, the Innovations Secretary, last weekend. Janet runs a stall in Ridley Road market, east London. The cabinet minister is to issue guidelines which will stop councils from launching prosecutions over "essentially minor offences", including selling fruit and vegetables in pounds and ounces. .... Two high-powered lawyers, Michael Caplan QC and Oliver Mishcon, a barrister, have been retained to prepare the papers for the Pardon for the late Steve Thoburn, a Sunderland trader who sold a pound of bananas; John Dove and Julian Harman, both from Cornwall, found guilty of selling Brussels sprouts for 39p a pound; and Mr Hunt, guilty of pricing by the pound and they are being consulted with a view to also handling Janet Devers' appeal. I hope that Michael Caplan and Oliver Mishcon will be charging their fees in Pounds, Shillings and Pence, or Guineas. SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) On 28 Oct 2008, Peter Duncanson (BrE) wrote > I hope that Michael Caplan and Oliver Mishcon will be charging > their fees in Pounds, Shillings and Pence, or Guineas. Good god, man -- is there any doubt at all? Guineas, of course -- it simply *must* be; just like prizes for horse-races, doncha' know. SignatureCheers, Harvey CanEng and BrEng, indiscriminately mixed > On 28 Oct 2008, Peter Duncanson (BrE) wrote > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Guineas, of course -- it simply *must* be; just like prizes for > horse-races, doncha' know. And Harley Street fees. Erm, I mean _honoraria_. SignatureRoland Hutchinson Will play viola da gamba for food. NB mail to my.spamtrap [at] verizon.net is heavily filtered to remove spam. If your message looks like spam I may not see it. >On 28 Oct 2008, Peter Duncanson (BrE) wrote > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >Guineas, of course -- it simply *must* be; just like prizes for >horse-races, doncha' know. And the prices of the 'osses at Weatherby's too, Mr Jorrocks. SignaturePaul > On 28 Oct 2008, Peter Duncanson (BrE) wrote > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Guineas, of course -- it simply *must* be; just like prizes for > horse-races, doncha' know. What's wrong with groats? Signatureathel [..] > The cabinet minister is to issue guidelines which will stop councils from launching > prosecutions over "essentially minor offences", including selling fruit and vegetables > in pounds and ounces. Since, in Britain, one can get a hefty fine and a *criminal conviction* for overfilling a wheelie bin, I'll believe that when I can see it. As I've said before, fines for minor offences are simply the most recently invented form of stealth taxes. SignatureRobin (BrE) Herts, England > Since, in Britain, one can get a hefty fine and a *criminal > conviction* for overfilling a wheelie bin, I'll believe that when I > can see it. As I've said before, fines for minor offences are simply > the most recently invented form of stealth taxes. Recent being from about the 12th Century if we consider the term "a baker's dozen"? >> Since, in Britain, one can get a hefty fine and a *criminal >> conviction* for overfilling a wheelie bin, I'll believe that when I >> can see it. As I've said before, fines for minor offences are >> simply the most recently invented form of stealth taxes. > Recent being from about the 12th Century if we consider the term "a > baker's dozen"? Sixteenth century, barely (1599), according to the OED.[1] But that's not the same thing at all, I wouldn't think. That's a way to get around a minimum allowable weight for a dozen loaves while still allowing yourself to be (occasionally or systemmatically) underweight on individual loaves. [1] Hmm... This has got to be one of the earliest antedatings by just a few years that I've come up with. [Attn Jesse Sheidlower: OED antedating] Fie! this is not the fortieth dandiprat part of the affectionate _items_ hee hath bequeathed on your mysterie: with five thousand other doctrinal devotions hath he adopted himselfe more than by sounder ["founder"?] of your trade, conjoyning with the aforesaid doctor brother in eighty eight browne bakers dozen of almanackes. John Payne Collier, "Have With You to Saffron-Walden: or Gabriell Harveys Hunt is Up", in _Miscellaneous Tracts_, 1596 SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |To express oneself 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |In seventeen syllables Palo Alto, CA 94304 |Is very diffic | Tony Finch kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com (650)857-7572 http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ > [1] Hmm... This has got to be one of the earliest antedatings by just > a few years that I've come up with. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Saffron-Walden: or Gabriell Harveys Hunt is Up", > in _Miscellaneous Tracts_, 1596 What a wonderful title! I was prompted to seek it out. It's not easy to read but it's full of excellent words and might appeal to those aue readers who indulge in pogonotrophy. Here is the opening paragraph: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ To the most orthodoxal and reverent corrector of staring hairs, the sincere & finigraphcal rarifier of prolixious rough barbarism, the thrice egregious and censorial animadvertiser of vagrant mustachios, chief scavenger of chins, and principal *head-man of the parish wherein he dwells, special supervisor of all excremental superfluities for Trinity College in Cambridge, and (to conclude) a notable and singular benefactor to all beards in general, Don Richardo Barbarossa de Caesario, Tho: Nashe wisheth the highest top of his contentment and felicity, and the shortening of all his enemies. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- SignatureLaura (emulate St. George for email) >>> Since, in Britain, one can get a hefty fine and a *criminal >>> conviction* for overfilling a wheelie bin, I'll believe that when I [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > [1] Hmm... This has got to be one of the earliest antedatings by just > a few years that I've come up with. [...Splendid text from 1596 snipped...] I remember some Brit bakers were giving baker's dozens, and not as a gimmick, in the 1950s. SignatureMike. On 31 Oct, 18:49, "Mike Lyle" <mike_lyle...@REMOVETHISyahoo.co.uk> wrote: > >>> Since, in Britain, one can get a hefty fine and a *criminal > >>> conviction* for overfilling a wheelie bin, I'll believe that when I [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > I remember some Brit bakers were giving baker's dozens, and not as a > gimmick, in the 1950s. I bought, today, a box of pastries from Tesco. Labelled "Bakers Dozen", it contained six pain-au-chocolat, and seven croissants. -- WH On Oct 28, 5:25 pm, "Peter Duncanson (BrE)" <m...@peterduncanson.net> wrote: > Janet runs a stall in Ridley Road market, east London. How many leagues is that from Reading? John Kane, Kingston ON Canada On Oct 28, 9:20 am, "James Silverton" <not.jim.silver...@verizon.net> wrote: > Hello All! > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > pound weights for personal statistics and, if not, would the "stone" > method still be used? When I rule the world, steelyards will give mass in kilograms and scales with springs or pressure transducers will give weight in newtons. Maybe with a footnote giving mass in kilograms assuming a specified value of g. -- Jerry Friedman jerry_friedman@yahoo.com filted: >When I rule the world, steelyards will give mass in kilograms and >scales with springs or pressure transducers will give weight in >newtons. Maybe with a footnote giving mass in kilograms assuming a >specified value of g. When I rule the world, the weight of all things will have to be described in comparison to a familiar object from your childhood....r SignatureLittle-known fact: About 2% of the famous quotations credited to "Anonymous" were actually originated by Jasper D Anonymous, a 14th-century maker of carriage wheels. >On Oct 28, 9:20 am, "James Silverton" <not.jim.silver...@verizon.net> >wrote: [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >newtons. Maybe with a footnote giving mass in kilograms assuming a >specified value of g. Why not just have an adustment on the Newton machine? A g-dial, so to speak? Signature************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * >On Oct 28, 9:20 am, "James Silverton" <not.jim.silver...@verizon.net> >wrote: [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >newtons. Maybe with a footnote giving mass in kilograms assuming a >specified value of g. That's the physick! People just have to be told. Footnotes having been mentioned, it strikes me that when they are flat, 'Underneath the Arches' will have become a lost cause. Modern schooling over here seems to be divided into 'Key stage 1', 'Key stage 2' and so on. This hasn't meant anything to me until now, when I realise that it must refer to music lessons. SignaturePaul >On Oct 28, 9:20 am, "James Silverton" <not.jim.silver...@verizon.net> >wrote: [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >newtons. Maybe with a footnote giving mass in kilograms assuming a >specified value of g. "Steelyard balance" is a term I hadn't encountered before, so I Googled it to find that "The Oxford English Dictionary suggests that the name "steelyard" is derived from the Steelyard, the main trading base of the Hanseatic League in London in the 14th-century." (For more on them: http://www.answers.com/topic/hanseatic-league) My question is, is there a more common name, possibly an AmE one, for a "steelyard balance"? A straight-beam balance, perhaps? SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs Near Dublin, Ireland |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.