 |
 | 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 / March 2009Throwing before it a wake
Hello: As far as I know, a wake comes after, not before. Is this an extension? ------ On that night an enormous freighter had plowed right through the fishing grounds, throwing before it a wake large enough to knock even a big man overboard. Snow falling on cedars, ?by David Guterson, Page 253 ------  SignatureThanks. Marius Hancu >Hello: > >As far as I know, a wake comes after, not before. Is this an extension? Yes. It is a bow wave. But as the boat moves through the water the wave that starts as a bow wave spreads out and is left behind as part of the wake. Pretty picture: http://www.resourcesystemsconsulting.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/Image/Bow%20Wav e%201.jpg >------ >On that night an enormous freighter had plowed right through the fishing [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Snow falling on cedars, ?by David Guterson, Page 253 >------ SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) > >As far as I know, a wake comes after, not before. Is this an extension? > > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Pretty picture: > http://www.resourcesystemsconsulting.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/Image/Bow%20Wav e%201.jpg Indeed. Thanks. >> >As far as I know, a wake comes after, not before. Is this an extension? >> > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >Indeed. >Thanks. I see that is the image chosen for the Wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bow_wave SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) > Yes. It is a bow wave. But as the boat moves through the water the wave > that starts as a bow wave spreads out and is left behind as part of the > wake. > > Pretty picture: > >http://www.resourcesystemsconsulting.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/Image/Bow%20Wav e%201.jpg I'll see that and raise you one: http://web.me.com/john.varela/temp/20060211.jpg SignatureJohn Varela Trade NEWlamps for OLDlamps for email >> Yes. It is a bow wave. But as the boat moves through the water the wave >> that starts as a bow wave spreads out and is left behind as part of the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >http://web.me.com/john.varela/temp/20060211.jpg Those are moving much much faster and much much more efficiently. SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) > >> Yes. It is a bow wave. But as the boat moves through the water the wave > >> that starts as a bow wave spreads out and is left behind as part of the [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Those are moving much much faster and much much more efficiently. I thought the topic had drifted to pretty pictures of boats and waves. Where is Skitt? Surely he has a photo to add to the pot. SignatureJohn Varela Trade NEWlamps for OLDlamps for email >>>> Yes. It is a bow wave. But as the boat moves through the water the >>>> wave that starts as a bow wave spreads out and is left behind as [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > I thought the topic had drifted to pretty pictures of boats and > waves. Where is Skitt? Surely he has a photo to add to the pot. Strangely, I have no pictures of my boats, in action or otherwise. They are long gone now. The last one I had, a Vaporvette (a 12-footer with a 35hp Evinrude), barely touched water when at speed, so there was no bow wave nor much of a wake. SignatureSkitt (AmE) > Hello: > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Snow falling on cedars, ?by David Guterson, Page 253 > ------ A bow-wake can push in front of the boat, causing the wave to arrive before the vessel. Like this rather less dramatic example: http://picasaweb.google.com/adamdrock/NewZealand#5104255982495078018 SignatureDavid > Hello: > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > grounds, throwing before it a wake large enough to knock even a big man > overboard. I think most of us, asked to define "wake" (in this usage), would come up with something like this, from COD; "a trail of disturbed water or air left by the passage of a ship or aircraft." But "an emormous freighter" would disturb water in front of it as well as alongside and behind, and I don't see anything wrong with including all the disturbed water within the concept of "wake." I've been trying to think of a word that connotes just the water thrown up in front, and I can't come up with one. (This being aue, it's probably only a matter of time before someone does.) For lack of anything more precise, I'd settle for "wake" as serviceable, if not ideal. SignatureBob Lieblich The Old Salt > > As far as I know, a wake comes after, not before. Is this an extension? > > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > of time before someone does.) For lack of anything more precise, I'd > settle for "wake" as serviceable, if not ideal. Thank you all. Marius Hancu > > On that night an enormous freighter had plowed right through the > > fishing grounds, throwing before it a wake large enough to knock [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > can't come up with one. (This being aue, it's probably only a matter > of time before someone does.) Maybe not. Clearly David Guterson didn't. DC -- >> Hello: >> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > of time before someone does.) For lack of anything more precise, I'd > settle for "wake" as serviceable, if not ideal. I don't see what's wrong with "bow-wave": they come in all sizes. . Mike, who may have a great future behind him, but has never left much of an aftermath in front of him. > > I think most of us, asked to define "wake" (in this usage), would > > come up with something like this, from COD; "a trail of disturbed [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > I don't see what's wrong with "bow-wave": they come in all sizes. Yup, that'll do. Ahem. DC -- > > > I think most of us, asked to define "wake" (in this usage), would > > > come up with something like this, from COD; "a trail of disturbed [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Yup, that'll do. Ahem. Right you both are. I thought of "bow wave" not long after reading an earlier post using it. SignatureBob Lieblich Alert as ever > I don't see what's wrong with "bow-wave": they come in all sizes. If the speed of the surface bow wave is greater than the speed of the boat, then the bow wave will in fact travel ahead of the vessel. Common experience is that the boat is moving so slowly, and the bow wave is so small, that the boater thinks of it as ripples rather than a wave. But "an enormous freighter" moving slowly might throw a significant wave ahead of itself. SignatureJohn Varela Trade NEWlamps for OLDlamps for email >> I don't see what's wrong with "bow-wave": they come in all sizes. > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >than a wave. But "an enormous freighter" moving slowly might throw >a significant wave ahead of itself. Last week I was watching very large ships move slowly up a channel near Jacksonville Beach. There was no appreciable bow or stern wake. Some sort of underwater movement followed them, though, and caused the water to rise almost five feet at the shore line in a Tsunami-like wave. The surface of the water in the channel was very calm. SignatureTony Cooper - Orlando, Florida >>> I don't see what's wrong with "bow-wave": they come in all sizes. >> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > water to rise almost five feet at the shore line in a Tsunami-like > wave. The surface of the water in the channel was very calm. I suddenly remember from boating on the Thames that Salter's steamers surprisingly announced their imminent passage by a /lowering/ of the water-level. To a non-physicist, very strange. So strange, indeed, that I'm wondering if these clear memories are false. SignatureMike. [...] > I suddenly remember from boating on the Thames that Salter's steamers > surprisingly announced their imminent passage by a /lowering/ of the > water-level. To a non-physicist, very strange. So strange, indeed, that > I'm wondering if these clear memories are false. A ship moves forward by propelling water backwards. Depending on the depth of the water, I can imagine a water deficit ahead of the ship, which could lower the water level noticeably if the water is sufficiently shallow SignatureLes (BrE) Les Danks: > A ship moves forward by propelling water backwards. Many of them do. (Including steamships, the previous context.) SignatureMark Brader "Men are animals." Toronto "What are women? Plants, birds, fish?" msb@vex.net -- Spider Robinson, "Night of Power" > Les Danks: >> A ship moves forward by propelling water backwards. > > Many of them do. (Including steamships, the previous context.) Sailing ships don't, of course--just wanted to see who was awake. Convinced? I thought not. Another thinko: the width of the waterway certainly has a greater influence than the depth on the amount by which the water level drops. That's why it's so noticeable in the Thames, which is quite narrow in places. A friend of mine from India once told me how shocked he had been when he saw the Thames for the first time. Having only heard about it, he was expecting something much grander; compared to the Ganges, the Thames is more or less a rivulet for most of its length. SignatureLes (BrE) >> Les Danks: >>> A ship moves forward by propelling water backwards. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > compared to the Ganges, the Thames is more or less a rivulet for most > of its length. I once took a punt as far up the Thames as it would go. A fascinating trip, but I did indeed run out of navigable water quite some way before the source. I hoped to come back one day in a kayak to see how much further I could get, with the aid of judicious portages, but I never got round to it. Might be a nice little project for an oldie if I can get fit enough... SignatureMike. > I once took a punt as far up the Thames as it would go. A fascinating > trip, but I did indeed run out of navigable water quite some way before > the source. I hoped to come back one day in a kayak to see how much > further I could get, with the aid of judicious portages, but I never got > round to it. Might be a nice little project for an oldie if I can get > fit enough... I think "portages" is rather a grand word for a kayak, what you can get under your arm. SignatureDavid >> I once took a punt as far up the Thames as it would go. A fascinating >> trip, but I did indeed run out of navigable water quite some way before [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >I think "portages" is rather a grand word for a kayak, what you can get >under your arm. A lot would depend on how self-sufficient this expedition will be. If Kayak Mike decides to carry all the necessary food and drink, clothing and camping gear for a trip that might take several days he would not be able to simply tuck it under one or even two arms. It might be necessary to hire fit and sturdy native bearers. In fact, with enough bearers not only the kayak(s) and the baggage but Mike himself could be ported. SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) >>> I once took a punt as far up the Thames as it would go. A fascinating >>> trip, but I did indeed run out of navigable water quite some way before [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >>I think "portages" is rather a grand word for a kayak, what you can get >>under your arm. > A lot would depend on how self-sufficient this expedition will be. If > Kayak Mike decides to carry all the necessary food and drink, clothing > and camping gear for a trip that might take several days he would not be > able to simply tuck it under one or even two arms. > It might be necessary to hire fit and sturdy native bearers. In fact, > with enough bearers not only the kayak(s) and the baggage but Mike > himself could be ported. They remade The Producers. I bit my tongue. They are remaking The Rocky Horror Picture Show. I shall look away. But if there is to be a remake of Three Men in a Boat, I must fire off a very sharp letter to The Times. SignatureLars Eighner <http://larseighner.com/> usenet@larseighner.com 63 days since Rick Warren prayed over Bush's third term. Obama: No hope, no change, more of the same. Yes, he can, but no, he won't. >>>> I once took a punt as far up the Thames as it would go. A fascinating >>>> trip, but I did indeed run out of navigable water quite some way before [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >Horror Picture Show. I shall look away. But if there is to be a remake of >Three Men in a Boat, I must fire off a very sharp letter to The Times. Ahem. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0756255/combined Griff Rhys Jones, Rory McGrath and Dara O'Briain re-trace the journey of Jerome K. Jerome from his book "Three Men in a Boat". The BBC issued this press release before filming began: http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2005/09_september/14/boat .shtml Their odyssey will take place in an exact replica of the wooden skiff used by author Jerome K Jerome, George, Harris and Montmorency the dog. The book was first published in 1889, and the series will follow the original journey as faithfully as the passage of 116 years will allow. They will moor where the original protagonists moored, sleep in the boat where the original characters slumbered, and stay in some of the same pubs and guest-houses. "It's not intended as an exact recreation," said Commissioning Executive Gilly Hall, "But more an opportunity for three funny men to entertain audiences with themes that have already amused and delighted generations of readers." I found it enjoyable. SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) [snip and apologies to LE] >http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0756255/combined > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > >I found it enjoyable. Any chance it's on DVD for the US? Signaturecharles >[snip and apologies to LE] >> [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > >Any chance it's on DVD for the US? It seems to be available only in Region 2 format which means that you would need a multi-region DVD player to view it North America. It is available through Amazon.co.uk but not Amazon.com. I'm not sure whether it can be shipped to the US. SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) >>[snip and apologies to LE] >>> [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] >available through Amazon.co.uk but not Amazon.com. I'm not sure whether >it can be shipped to the US. I think amazon.co.uk will ship anything anywhere - at a price. And virtually all DVD players, even those sold in the US, have multi-region capability; the only problem is that (due to an argreement with the big film studios) they do not have it preset. There are literally thousand of websites with detailed instructions on how to do this for yourself. Although it is always described as a "hack", it doesn't correspond to my understanding of that word - the machines are designed to operate that way, they just don't publicise the fact. SignatureDon Aitken Mail to the From: address is not read. To email me, substitute "clara.co.uk" for "freeuk.com" >> It seems to be available only in Region 2 format which means that you >> would need a multi-region DVD player to view it North America. It is >> available through Amazon.co.uk but not Amazon.com. I'm not sure whether >> it can be shipped to the US. > > I think amazon.co.uk will ship anything anywhere - at a price. They're probably prepared to do so, but there are other constraints. For example, they will not ship some US DVDs to Europe. I can't believe this is imposed by Amazon - it must be some copyright reason. Also, Amazon will not send multi-tools such as Leatherman outside the USA. I can't think what the reason for that might be. > And > virtually all DVD players, even those sold in the US, have > multi-region capability; the only problem is that (due to an > argreement with the big film studios) they do not have it preset. While that is true, I'm not sure if US NTSC TVs can cope with a PAL signal. SignatureDavid >>> It seems to be available only in Region 2 format which means that you >>> would need a multi-region DVD player to view it North America. It is [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > >While that is true, I'm not sure if US NTSC TVs can cope with a PAL signal. I'd be surprised if any of them can. SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs Near Dublin, Ireland >>[snip and apologies to LE] >>> [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] >available through Amazon.co.uk but not Amazon.com. I'm not sure whether >it can be shipped to the US. Thanks, I'll check it out. -- charles >>>[snip and apologies to LE] >>>> [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > >Thanks, I'll check it out. This is the one - not to be confused with any other version: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Three-Men-Boat-Another-DVD/dp/B001E4W25W/ref=sr_1_3?ie=U TF8&qid=1238341577&sr=1-3 SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) >>> I once took a punt as far up the Thames as it would go. A >>> fascinating trip, but I did indeed run out of navigable water quite [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > with enough bearers not only the kayak(s) and the baggage but Mike > himself could be ported. Native porters of the Upper Thames Valley not what they used to be, old man, what? Not too long ago they'd work all day for a real sahib for half-a-crown, with a touch of the old horsewhip to wake up any slackers, and glad of it. But Snuffy Carruthers tells me it's all health and safety, communist minimum wage, equal opportunities for Sapphic wheelchair users, and instruction sheets in fifteen languages these days. I blame Macmillan, of course: three guesses where his wind of change came from, eh what? Haw, haw! No, me dear old thing, it's a solo show or none at all for your uncle Mike. >Native porters of the Upper Thames Valley not what they used to be, old >man, what? Not too long ago they'd work all day for a real sahib for [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >change came from, eh what? Haw, haw! No, me dear old thing, it's a solo >show or none at all for your uncle Mike. Quite right too. Still, old chap, may the occasional Memsahib tool over with a hamper of cucumber sandwiches if she spots you trundling past? SignatureKaty Jennison spamtrap: remove the first two letters after the @ >> Native porters of the Upper Thames Valley not what they used to be, >> old man, what? Not too long ago they'd work all day for a real sahib [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > over with a hamper of cucumber sandwiches if she spots you trundling > past? Ra-ther, doncha know? SignatureMike. >Native porters of the Upper Thames Valley not what they used to be, old >man, what? Not too long ago they'd work all day for a real sahib for [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >change came from, eh what? Haw, haw! No, me dear old thing, it's a solo >show or none at all for your uncle Mike. If you can present the whole exercise as a first-stage audition for a new and at-the-moment-secret TV reality show they'll come flocking. SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) >> Native porters of the Upper Thames Valley not what they used to be, >> old man, what? Not too long ago they'd work all day for a real sahib [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > If you can present the whole exercise as a first-stage audition for a > new and at-the-moment-secret TV reality show they'll come flocking. Dashed good point, Dunkers. They'd even take the horsewhip in their stride for that, eh? One rather warms to the idea... SignatureMike. > > > > I once took a punt as far up the Thames as it would go. A > > > > fascinating trip, but I did indeed run out of navigable water [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > wind of change came from, eh what? Haw, haw! No, me dear old thing, > it's a solo show or none at all for your uncle Mike. and Shame, I was enjoying the idea of you resplendent in a solar topee and born aloft on a pallet by sweating home counties bearers in their colourful native garb of stripped blazers and straw boaters... DC -- [...] >> Native porters of the Upper Thames Valley not what they used to be, >> old man, what? [...] No, me dear old thing, >> it's a solo show or none at all for your uncle Mike. > > Shame, I was enjoying the idea of you resplendent in a solar topee > [...] Not taking the pith or anything, but "sola". Common error, don't ye know, what? SignatureMike. [...] >> Shame, I was enjoying the idea of you resplendent in a solar topee >> [...] >> > Not taking the pith or anything, but "sola". Common error, don't ye > know, what? But perhaps he meant a conical tent with an awning. SignatureLes (BrE) <snip> >Common error, don't ye >know, what? There's a self-referential statement if I ever saw one. SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs Near Dublin, Ireland >>> I once took a punt as far up the Thames as it would go. A fascinating >>> trip, but I did indeed run out of navigable water quite some way before [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >with enough bearers not only the kayak(s) and the baggage but Mike >himself could be ported. When Big George and I would portage my canoe around impassable portions of rivers in Virginia, West Virginia and Pennsylvania, we carried our provisions in backpacks we took with us in the canoe. SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs Near Dublin, Ireland > >>> I once took a punt as far up the Thames as it would go. A > fascinating >>> trip, but I did indeed run out of navigable water [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > portions of rivers in Virginia, West Virginia and Pennsylvania, we > carried our provisions in backpacks we took with us in the canoe. I hope you watched out for the banjo players. DC -- >> >>> I once took a punt as far up the Thames as it would go. A >> fascinating >>> trip, but I did indeed run out of navigable water [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > >I hope you watched out for the banjo players. I'll be buggered if I go canoeing in the Appalachians. SignatureJames [...] >>> When Big George and I would portage my canoe around impassable >>> portions of rivers in Virginia, West Virginia and Pennsylvania, we [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > I'll be buggered if I go canoeing in the Appalachians. You don't need to: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QrzZPXe0pU&feature=PlayList\\ &p=C8D1D6C2AC26F154&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=13> <http://tinyurl.com/cr5ovb> SignatureLes (BrE) > [...] >>>> When Big George and I would portage my canoe around impassable >>>> portions of rivers in Virginia, West Virginia and Pennsylvania, >>>> we carried our provisions in backpacks we took with us in the >>>> canoe. >>> I hope you watched out for the banjo players. >> I'll be buggered if I go canoeing in the Appalachians. > You don't need to: > <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QrzZPXe0pU&feature=PlayList\\ > &p=C8D1D6C2AC26F154&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=13> > http://tinyurl.com/cr5ovb Think I recognise that kid down in front on the left. >>> When Big George and I would portage my canoe around impassable >>> portions of rivers in Virginia, West Virginia and Pennsylvania, we >>> carried our provisions in backpacks we took with us in the canoe. >> I hope you watched out for the banjo players. > > I'll be buggered if I go canoeing in the Appalachians. Squeal, Hogg, squeal. SignatureDavid >>>> When Big George and I would portage my canoe around impassable >>>> portions of rivers in Virginia, West Virginia and Pennsylvania, we [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Squeal, Hogg, squeal. B-oink SignatureJames >>>>>> I once took a punt as far up the Thames as it would go. A >>> fascinating >>> trip, but I did indeed run out of navigable water [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > I'll be buggered if I go canoeing in the Appalachians. Oh, you don't have a chastity belt? >> >>> I once took a punt as far up the Thames as it would go. A >> fascinating >>> trip, but I did indeed run out of navigable water [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > >I hope you watched out for the banjo players. Give me deliverance. SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs Near Dublin, Ireland the Omrud filted: >> I once took a punt as far up the Thames as it would go. A fascinating >> trip, but I did indeed run out of navigable water quite some way before [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >I think "portages" is rather a grand word for a kayak, what you can get >under your arm. The word has no obligation to confine itself to craft of any particular size; it works as well here as it did for Fitzcarraldo....r SignatureA pessimist sees the glass as half empty. An optometrist asks whether you see the glass more full like this?...or like this? >>> Les Danks: >>>> A ship moves forward by propelling water backwards. [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] >round to it. Might be a nice little project for an oldie if I can get >fit enough... Thames Head, traditionally marked as the source on maps, is quite a long way from any water at all in a normal year. Even at the legal limit of navigation (High Bridge, Cricklade) there is nothing more than a shallow brook, probably insufficient even for your kayak. It is said that a craft drawing 4 ins, powered by a modified outboard, has made it to Hannington Bridge, but that was probably in a wet year. The practical limit for normal powered craft is the roundhouse at Inglesham, just above Lechlade. SignatureDon Aitken Mail to the From: address is not read. To email me, substitute "clara.co.uk" for "freeuk.com" ... > >I once took a punt as far up the Thames as it would go. A fascinating > >trip, but I did indeed run out of navigable water quite some way before [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Thames Head, traditionally marked as the source on maps, is quite a > long way from any water at all in a normal year. ... BrE "quite a long way from any water at all" = NME "right by the water" -- Jerry Friedman is exaggerating a little. > ... > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > BrE "quite a long way from any water at all" = NME "right by the > water" We mustn't forget the hotel/guest house English: "view of the sea/ocean" which omits the part about a long ladder and a telescope. SignatureRob Bannister > I suddenly remember from boating on the Thames that Salter's steamers > surprisingly announced their imminent passage by a /lowering/ of the > water-level. To a non-physicist, very strange. So strange, indeed, that > I'm wondering if these clear memories are false. Not at all - it happens in constricted channels. The level drops in front of the boat, rises where the bow wave hits the side, drops down again and then goes back to normal, after some wobbles, where the wake hits it. I'll try to take a picture when out on the boat at Easter. SignatureOnline waterways route planner: http://canalplan.org.uk development version: http://canalplan.eu >> I don't see what's wrong with "bow-wave": they come in all sizes. > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >than a wave. But "an enormous freighter" moving slowly might throw >a significant wave ahead of itself. That would be rare. SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs Near Dublin, Ireland > >> I don't see what's wrong with "bow-wave": they come in all sizes. > > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > That would be rare. You're playing with fire... -- >Chuck Riggs wrote: >> On 22 Mar 2009 23:13:15 GMT, "John Varela" <OLDlamps@verizon.net> >> > On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 19:42:20 UTC, "Mike Lyle" >> >> I don't see what's wrong with "bow-wave": they come in all sizes. >> > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >You're playing with fire... All the better to cook it with. SignaturePaul >> >> I don't see what's wrong with "bow-wave": they come in all sizes. >> > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >You're playing with fire... I enjoy living dangerously. SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs Near Dublin, Ireland >>> Hello: >>> [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > who may have a great future behind him, but has never left much of an > aftermath in front of him. I guess a purist could argue that if we rephrase it as "throwing before it a bow wave", the word "bow" is redundant, since anything in front of a moving ship is automatically in front of the bow. (Unless it's going backwards, I guess). The same purist would shrink at the expression "a round circle", because circles are round by definition. The formulation "throwing before it a wake" avoids this redundancy, and makes clear that it is not just a wave, but the wave caused by the boat's motion. T. >>>> Hello: >>>> [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] >and makes clear that it is not just a wave, but the wave caused by the >boat's motion. <steers a course for the relevant "wake" entry in the OED: wake, n.2 [Not found before the 16th c., but possibly much older; either directly or mediately a. ON. (*vaku) v{ohook}k str. fem., vaka wk. fem., hole or opening in ice. The ON. word was probably applied to the path made for itself by a vessel through ice, and from this use the sense trace or track of a vessel in the water may have been developed by Scandinavian navigators in British seas. Sense 5, line of hay, if it really belongs to the same word, may be a transferred use of the nautical sense. The word is represented in all the Scandinavian dialects, and has been adopted in Du., Fris., and Ger. The sense track of a vessel is found, outside Eng., only in Norw. vok (dial. vaak), NFris. (Sylt) waak; the older sense, hole or channel in ice (sometimes, a piece of water kept unfrozen by wind or current) belongs to MSw. vaak, vak, Sw. vak (cf. Sw. väcka to cut a hole in ice), Norw. vok, Da. vaage, WFris. wek, wjek(ke, Du. wak neut., MLG., LG. (whence mod.G.) wake fem. The word is commonly supposed to be connected with ON. v{ohook}k-r, Du. wak, moist, damp: see WAK a. This view involves some difficulty, as the ON. adj. has the stem v{ohook}kv-, while the n. has genit. vakar, pl. vakar, -ir. Connexion with WAKE a. and v. seems not impossible: the freeing of the water from ice may have been regarded as an awakening.] SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) >>>> As far as I know, a wake comes after, not before. Is this an >>>> extension? >>>> ------ >>>> On that night an enormous freighter had plowed right through the >>>> fishing grounds, throwing before it a wake large enough to knock >>>> even a big man overboard. >>> I think most of us, asked to define "wake" (in this usage), would >>> come up with something like this, from COD; "a trail of disturbed [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >>> For lack of anything more precise, I'd settle for "wake" as >>> serviceable, if not ideal. >> I don't see what's wrong with "bow-wave": they come in all sizes. >> Mike, >> who may have a great future behind him, but has never left much of >> an aftermath in front of him. > I guess a purist could argue that if we rephrase it as "throwing > before it a bow wave", the word "bow" is redundant, since anything [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > and makes clear that it is not just a wave, but the wave caused by > the boat's motion. On the other hand, you could say that in "throwing before it a wave", the word "throwing" makes it clear enough that the wave is caused by the boat's motion. >> Hello: >> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >of time before someone does.) For lack of anything more precise, I'd >settle for "wake" as serviceable, if not ideal. I believe it is called a bow wave: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bow_wave 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.