 |
 | 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 / September 2009'chaise lounge' acceptable?
I thought the words came straight out of the French - chaise longue. But everyone I hear, even a teacher-friend who knows some French, calls it a chaise lounge. > I thought the words came straight out of the French - chaise longue. > But everyone I hear, even a teacher-friend who knows some French, > calls it a chaise lounge. I've never heard that in British English, where "chaise longue" is normal.  SignatureDavid On 30 Aug 2009, the Omrud wrote >> I thought the words came straight out of the French - chaise >> longue. But everyone I hear, even a teacher-friend who knows >> some French, calls it a chaise lounge. > > I've never heard that in British English, where "chaise longue" > is normal. Burchfield notes that the "lounge" form "sometimes turns up" in AmE, "esp. in trade advertisements". It's a screaming error, though. SignatureCheers, Harvey CanEng and BrEng, indiscriminately mixed > On 30 Aug 2009, the Omrud wrote > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > It's a screaming error, though. 'Lounge' is an error, but a very common one. I get the impression that in the US 'lounge' is so common that many people assume it is correct. SignatureCheryl >> On 30 Aug 2009, the Omrud wrote >> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >'Lounge' is an error, but a very common one. I get the impression that >in the US 'lounge' is so common that many people assume it is correct. Absolutely. Until reading this thread, and looking up the term, it never occurred to me that "chaise lounge" is in any way incorrect. I would have thought "longue" was a typo. Go into store in this area that sells porch, patio, or pool furniture and ask to see a chaise lounge, and you will be shown one. Don't bother telling the clerk that "chaise lounge" is a "screaming error". You won't be believed. SignatureTony Cooper - Orlando, Florida >>> On 30 Aug 2009, the Omrud wrote >>> [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > bother telling the clerk that "chaise lounge" is a "screaming error". > You won't be believed. Chaise lounge: http://rafflesfurnishings.com/catalog/images/01Synthetic%20/Greece%20Chaise%20Lo unge.jpg Chaise longue: http://amazingemporium.com/shop/images/Monique%20Chaise%20Longue.jpg Adrian http://idlish.blogspot.com >>>> On 30 Aug 2009, the Omrud wrote >>>> [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > Chaise lounge: > http://rafflesfurnishings.com/catalog/images/01Synthetic%20/Greece%20Chaise%20Lo unge.jpg I would call that merely a deck chair, or lawn chair, or some other similar informal term like 'recliner'. > Chaise longue: > http://amazingemporium.com/shop/images/Monique%20Chaise%20Longue.jpg Yes, that's it. I'm sure there's a local dialect term for them, as well, although it escapes my memory. Less elegant versions used to be quite common in great-gandmother's kitchen. SignatureCheryl >>>>> On 30 Aug 2009, the Omrud wrote >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] >I would call that merely a deck chair, or lawn chair, or some other >similar informal term like 'recliner'. The problem is, with your terminology, that the clerk would not show you the piece illustrated in that link (or a similar piece) if you asked to see a deck chair or a lawn chair or a recliner. It may not be correct to call it a "chaise lounge", but calling it that would result in being shown something similar to what is pictured in that link. A "deck chair", in this area, is something like this: http://blogs.mcall.com/.a/6a00d8341c4fe353ef011168e3aeb4970c-800wi You might be shown this one: http://www.myweddinggiftsregistry.com/images/deck-chair.jpg Note that the foot rest folds away. Asking to see a "lawn chair" would lead you to this: http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml05/05027a.jpg Ask for a recliner, and you will be shown something like a "Lazy Boy"; something you wouldn't put on your porch, patio, or pool deck. http://www.chinesemol.com/member/upload/product/5991646/20071261345356132.jpg If you want to see a "real" chaise longue, go to an antique store or high-end decorator shop and ask to see a "fainting couch". If you want to see an artistic representation, watch "Mystery" on PBS and the sighing lady in the opening. SignatureTony Cooper - Orlando, Florida >>>> On 30 Aug 2009, the Omrud wrote >>>> [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > Adrian > http://idlish.blogspot.com Ah, I found another dada point: http://smithsfurniture.ca/showcaselist.php?type_id=97 "It seems that "In modern French the term chaise longue can refer to any long reclining chair such as a deckchair."" Of course, we are writing modern English, not modern French. SignatureCheryl > >>>> On 30 Aug 2009, the Omrud wrote > [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > > Of course, we are writing modern English, not modern French. And in commonly used French here, it turns out that the items discussed elsethread as 'recliners' are -- get this -- 'fauteuils relax'. The AmE 'chaise longue' is a 'meridienne'. Go figure. (I make no representations as to the opinion an academy or other expert in FR would have about this, I merely report what I see advertised in furniture and antiques shops.) cheers, Stephanie in Brussels > > >>>> On 30 Aug 2009, the Omrud wrote > > [quoted text clipped - 45 lines] > in FR would have about this, I merely report what I see advertised in > furniture and antiques shops.) Not quite. The French and Americans agree that the Le Corbusier thing is a chaise longue, rsp. a chaise lounge, Jan > The French and Americans agree that the Le Corbusier thing is a chaise > longue, rsp. a chaise lounge, > > Jan ObEnglishUsage: "rsp."? (Surely, Jan, you know better than this!) SignatureRoland Hutchinson He calls himself "the Garden State's leading violist da gamba," ... comparable to being ruler of an exceptionally small duchy. --Newark (NJ) Star Ledger ( http://tinyurl.com/RolandIsNJ ) Roland wrote on Wed, 2 Sep 2009 15:37:48 +0000 (UTC): >> The French and Americans agree that the Le Corbusier thing is >> a chaise longue, rsp. a chaise lounge, >> >> Jan > ObEnglishUsage: "rsp."? (Surely, Jan, you know better than this!) >He calls himself "the Garden State's leading violist da gamba," .>.. comparable to being ruler of an exceptionally small duchy. " Am I or am I not correct in saying that the "viola da gamba is also called a "double bass" or a "bull fiddle"? I like the last one. SignatureJames Silverton Potomac, Maryland Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not > Roland wrote on Wed, 2 Sep 2009 15:37:48 +0000 (UTC): > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >Am I or am I not correct in saying that the "viola da gamba is also >called a "double bass" or a "bull fiddle"? I like the last one. I believe not! From the Viola da Gamba Society of America: http://vdgsa.org/pgs/stuff.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viola_da_gamba http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_bass SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) >> Roland wrote on Wed, 2 Sep 2009 15:37:48 +0000 (UTC): >> [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_bass The confusion understandably arises because the most commonly encountered size of viola da gamba is also called a "bass viol" -- which, in turn, is also a name used for the instrument known more precisely contrabass, double bass, bull fiddle, stand-up bass etc. SignatureRoland Hutchinson He calls himself "the Garden State's leading violist da gamba," ... comparable to being ruler of an exceptionally small duchy. --Newark (NJ) Star Ledger ( http://tinyurl.com/RolandIsNJ ) Roland wrote on Wed, 2 Sep 2009 20:29:17 +0000 (UTC): > The confusion understandably arises because the most commonly > encountered size of viola da gamba is also called a "bass > viol" -- which, in turn, is also a name used for the > instrument known more precisely contrabass, double bass, bull > fiddle, stand-up bass etc. Thanks, can any Gambist(?), or anyone else, refer me to a CD that might indicate the difference in sound between a viola da gamba and a bull fiddle? SignatureJames Silverton Potomac, Maryland Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not > Roland wrote on Wed, 2 Sep 2009 20:29:17 +0000 (UTC): > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > indicate the difference in sound between a viola da gamba and a bull > fiddle? Yes: gambist (at least informally) or violist da gamba, or violist (spelled the same, but pronounced differently, from the word for a viola player). The two instruments are actually noticeably similar in tone, though the contrabass plays in a lower register. (The bass viola da gamba is approximately the size and pitch of a cello). Here's a recording I very much like of the viola da gamba all by its lonesome, played by Sarah Cunningham, who was my teacher once upon a time (and a very good time it was): http://www.amazon.com/Play-This-Passionate-Sarah-Cunningham/dp/B000M8N4ZS You can also purchase individual tracks for download of this album. Here's a short freebie, with me playing the lead part, in a somewhat dated sound-file format (it's been on the Web for a long time!): http://www.vdgsa.org/pgs/stuff.html#DEFINE (You want the Couperin "Vivement".) I'll let bass players recommend recordings of their instrument. SignatureRoland Hutchinson He calls himself "the Garden State's leading violist da gamba," ... comparable to being ruler of an exceptionally small duchy. --Newark (NJ) Star Ledger ( http://tinyurl.com/RolandIsNJ ) Roland wrote on Thu, 3 Sep 2009 04:29:46 +0000 (UTC): >> Roland wrote on Wed, 2 Sep 2009 20:29:17 +0000 (UTC): >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >> that might indicate the difference in sound between a viola >> da gamba and a bull fiddle? > Yes: gambist (at least informally) or violist da gamba, or > violist (spelled the same, but pronounced differently, from > the word for a viola player). > The two instruments are actually noticeably similar in tone, > though the contrabass plays in a lower register. (The bass > viola da gamba is approximately the size and pitch of a > cello). > Here's a recording I very much like of the viola da gamba all > by its lonesome, played by Sarah Cunningham, who was my > teacher once upon a time (and a very good time it was): > http://www.amazon.com/Play-This-Passionate-Sarah-Cunningham/dp/B000M8N4ZS > You can also purchase individual tracks for download of this > album. > Here's a short freebie, with me playing the lead part, in a > somewhat dated sound-file format (it's been on the Web for a > long time!): > http://www.vdgsa.org/pgs/stuff.html#DEFINE > (You want the Couperin "Vivement".) > I'll let bass players recommend recordings of their > instrument. Thanks for the suggestions and the information. I'm not a musician but I guess I was vaguely aware that there was a difference between viols and violins, the latter class, according to the 10th Edition of the "Oxford Companion to Music", being more suitable to public performance. It is stated that there is a devoted body of enthusiasts for older music who play viols. The Companion lists many differences in construction, especially in the number of strings, shape of sound holes and the presence of frets, and has a discussion of the sound quailities. There is even a picture of the quite large Dolmetsch family in 1929, all playing viols. SignatureJames Silverton Potomac, Maryland Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not > Roland wrote on Thu, 3 Sep 2009 04:29:46 +0000 (UTC): > [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] > is even a picture of the quite large Dolmetsch family in 1929, all > playing viols. A wonderful book, that old Oxford Companion. You have the last edition that retained the articles by its original author, the utterly irreplaceable Percy Scholes. Scholarship may have passed him by, even by the time of the 9th edition (which was the last one he personally edited -- one had really better say "wrote", as virtually every word was his except for the opera plot summaries!), but a finer lexicographer for turning a phrase and making his own strongly held opinions known has not walked this earth since. SignatureRoland Hutchinson He calls himself "the Garden State's leading violist da gamba," ... comparable to being ruler of an exceptionally small duchy. --Newark (NJ) Star Ledger ( http://tinyurl.com/RolandIsNJ ) Roland wrote on Thu, 3 Sep 2009 16:44:19 +0000 (UTC): >> Roland wrote on Thu, 3 Sep 2009 04:29:46 +0000 (UTC): >> [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] >>> all by its lonesome, played by Sarah Cunningham, who was my >>> teacher once upon a time (and a very good time it was): Thanks again for the suggestions. As I said, I don't know a lot about music but I bought the double CD, "Play This Passionate" by Sarah Cunningham. My initial reaction from the box was, if this is Sarah Cunningham she is most attractive since there is a picture of a very pretty young lady *holding* a viol and bow tho' she is said to be playing it. It is a pleasant set of CDs but I'd hardly describe most of the music as "Passionate". Melancholy and introspective are the words that come to my mind and I can imagine it as 17-18th century background music except for the last works by Joubert and Abel. SignatureJames Silverton Potomac, Maryland Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not > Roland wrote on Thu, 3 Sep 2009 16:44:19 +0000 (UTC): >>> Roland wrote on Thu, 3 Sep 2009 04:29:46 +0000 (UTC): >>> [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] >>>> all by its lonesome, played by Sarah Cunningham, who was my >>>> teacher once upon a time (and a very good time it was): > Thanks again for the suggestions. As I said, I don't know a lot about > music but I bought the double CD, "Play This Passionate" by Sarah [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > that come to my mind and I can imagine it as 17-18th century background > music except for the last works by Joubert and Abel. For a totally different take on viol playing, try "The Celtic Viol" by Jordi Savall, available on Alia Vox AVSA 9865. Savall is usually a "straight" viol player, but on a visit to, I think, Tralee he was very struck by Irish traditional music. On this CD he plays traditional Irish and Scottish tunes, and plays them I think excellently. No financial interest! With best wishes, Peter. SignaturePeter Young, (BrE), Consultant Anaesthetist, 1975-2004. (US equivalent: Attending Anesthesiologist) Cheltenham and Gloucester, UK. Now happily retired. http://pnyoung.orpheusweb.co.uk Dr wrote on Fri, 25 Sep 2009 16:33:35 +0100: >> Roland wrote on Thu, 3 Sep 2009 16:44:19 +0000 (UTC): >>>> Roland wrote on Thu, 3 Sep 2009 04:29:46 +0000 (UTC): >>>> [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] >>>>> all by its lonesome, played by Sarah Cunningham, who was >>>>> my teacher once upon a time (and a very good time it was): >> Thanks again for the suggestions. As I said, I don't know a >> lot about music but I bought the double CD, "Play This [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >> 17-18th century background music except for the last works by >> Joubert and Abel. > For a totally different take on viol playing, try "The Celtic > Viol" by Jordi Savall, available on Alia Vox AVSA 9865. Savall > is usually a "straight" viol player, but on a visit to, I > think, Tralee he was very struck by Irish traditional music. > On this CD he plays traditional Irish and Scottish tunes, and > plays them I think excellently. Thanks, I'll have to see if I can find it. SignatureJames Silverton Potomac, Maryland Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not >> Roland wrote on Thu, 3 Sep 2009 16:44:19 +0000 (UTC): >>>> Roland wrote on Thu, 3 Sep 2009 04:29:46 +0000 (UTC): >>>> [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] >>>>> all by its lonesome, played by Sarah Cunningham, who was my >>>>> teacher once upon a time (and a very good time it was): >> Thanks again for the suggestions. As I said, I don't know a lot about >> music but I bought the double CD, "Play This Passionate" by Sarah [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >> that come to my mind and I can imagine it as 17-18th century background >> music except for the last works by Joubert and Abel. > For a totally different take on viol playing, try "The Celtic Viol" by > Jordi Savall, available on Alia Vox AVSA 9865. Savall is usually a > "straight" viol player, but on a visit to, I think, Tralee he was very > struck by Irish traditional music. On this CD he plays traditional > Irish and Scottish tunes, and plays them I think excellently. Getting back marginally on-topic, as regards languages, the CD booklet is printed in: English French Italian German Catalan Castillian (standard Spanish) Irish Gaelic Scottish Gaelic which I think must be some sort of record (unintentional pun). With best wishes, Peter. SignaturePeter Young, (BrE), Consultant Anaesthetist, 1975-2004. (US equivalent: Attending Anesthesiologist) Cheltenham and Gloucester, UK. Now happily retired. http://pnyoung.orpheusweb.co.uk > Getting back marginally on-topic, as regards languages, the CD booklet > is printed in: [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > which I think must be some sort of record (unintentional pun). Pamphlets and leaflets produced by the Australian government routinely come in about a dozen different languages, but most of those listed above are absent. I think English, Italian, and Spanish might be included. The others are Chinese, Arabic, Greek, Maltese, Vietnamese, Serbian, Croatian, ... I'm having trouble remembering the rest. I'm not sure how the languages are chosen. Logically it should be from census data, but some of the choices don't match my impressions of the most common first languages in the country. Maybe it's the groups who are least willing to integrate into the larger community and learn English, but if that were so then Italian and Greek wouldn't be on the list. The inclusion of both Serbian and Croatian puzzles me. About 95% of the wording is the same in both languages. I guess it's just not diplomatically possible to ask either group to read the script of the other group. SignaturePeter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org For an e-mail address, see my web page. [...] > The inclusion of both Serbian and Croatian puzzles me. About 95% of > the wording is the same in both languages. I guess it's just not > diplomatically possible to ask either group to read the script of > the other group. Interviewing some French Foreign Legion Balkan hard cases during the former Yugoslavian horror shows, a journalist asked them "Are you Serbs or Croats?" Came the cheery reply, "That depends what the job is." SignatureMike. Dr wrote on Fri, 25 Sep 2009 22:55:09 +0100: >>> Roland wrote on Thu, 3 Sep 2009 16:44:19 +0000 (UTC): >>>>> Roland wrote on Thu, 3 Sep 2009 04:29:46 +0000 (UTC): >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >>>>>> my teacher once upon a time (and a very good time it >>>>>> was): >>> Thanks again for the suggestions. As I said, I don't know a >>> lot about music but I bought the double CD, "Play This [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >>> 17-18th century background music except for the last works >>> by Joubert and Abel. >> For a totally different take on viol playing, try "The Celtic >> Viol" by Jordi Savall, available on Alia Vox AVSA 9865. >> Savall is usually a "straight" viol player, but on a visit >> to, I think, Tralee he was very struck by Irish traditional >> music. On this CD he plays traditional Irish and Scottish >> tunes, and plays them I think excellently. > Getting back marginally on-topic, as regards language > Oh, that would be record for a.u.e. Look at the Dr Johnson thread. SignatureJames Silverton Potomac, Maryland Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not James Silverton filted: > Dr wrote on Fri, 25 Sep 2009 22:55:09 +0100: > >> Getting back marginally on-topic, as regards language > >> Oh, that would be record for a.u.e. Look at the Dr Johnson thread. Is that the Dr Johnson thread about bottled water, or the Dr Johnson thread about drive-up banking?...r SignatureA pessimist sees the glass as half empty. An optometrist asks whether you see the glass more full like this?...or like this? James Silverton set the following eddies spiralling through the space-time continuum: > Thanks again for the suggestions. As I said, I don't know a lot about > music but I bought the double CD, "Play This Passionate" by Sarah [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > that come to my mind and I can imagine it as 17-18th century background > music except for the last works by Joubert and Abel. Do the suffixes "da gamba" and "d'amore" for different sizes of viol, come from the fact that the former rests against the legs, while you hold the latter in your arms? Signatureξ:) Proud to be curly Interchange the alphabetic letter groups to reply > James Silverton set the following eddies spiralling through the > space-time continuum: [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Do the suffixes "da gamba" and "d'amore" for different sizes of viol, Not different sizes, different kinds. "Viol" ordinarily means viola da gamba, which comes in three common sizes (treble, tenor and bass) and some other, less common sizes (violone in at least two sizes, pardessus de viole, etc.) > come from the fact that the former rests against the legs, Yes. (In all sizes, even the smallest ones, the violas da gamba are held approximately vertically, supported by some part of the legs.) >while you > hold the latter in your arms? Not as such. The ones named for the fact that you hold them on the arm (in the smaller sizes at least) are the viola da braccio family -- better know today as the violin family (violin, viol, cello, maybe contrabass). The viola d'amore is one of a number of instruments that got "d'amore" or "d'amour" stuck onto their name in the late 17th or early 18th centuries. The oboe d'amore is probably the other best known one (used by Bach and by Richard Strauss among others). The "d'amore" designation seems to get attached to instruments that have a sweet sound -- in the case of the viola d'amore because of bowed wire strings (in the early form of the instrument) and/or sympathetic wire strings (in the later form); in the case of the oboe d'amore because it is built at a lower pitch than the ordanary oboe (about half way between the oboe and the English horn [BrE cor anglais] is size and pitch). SignatureRoland Hutchinson He calls himself "the Garden State's leading violist da gamba," ... comparable to being ruler of an exceptionally small duchy. --Newark (NJ) Star Ledger ( http://tinyurl.com/RolandIsNJ ) > Not quite. > The French and Americans agree that the Le Corbusier thing > is a chaise longue, rsp. a chaise lounge, But I wasn't talking about 'the French' -- I was talking about the French *language* as I have seen and heard it used here -- in Brussels. My neighbours were furniture dealers and restorers; I have used the words 'chaise longue' and their reply has used the word 'meridienne', which was new to me until then. Of course, we may or may not have been talking about a Corbu creation or some other long thing for sitting on. cheers, Stephanie in Brussels > > Not quite. > > The French and Americans agree that the Le Corbusier thing [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > may not have been talking about a Corbu creation or some other long > thing for sitting on. You may well have been, but they are different things. This is the Le Corbusier meridienne <http://www.architonic.com/1027254> And this is the Le Corbusier chaise longue <http://www.designerpages.com/products/59424-LC4> You would hate to get the wrong one, wouldn't you? Jan >>> Not quite. >>> The French and Americans agree that the Le Corbusier thing [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > You would hate to get the wrong one, > wouldn't you? That second one doesn't look like any chaise longue I've ever seen. Aha, but I see that they don't call it that. The web page identifies it as a chaise lounge. That confirms something I've been suspecting since this thread started: that a chaise longue and a chaise lounge are entirely different items of furniture. The "meridienne" you mentioned is a lot closer to what I'd call a chaise longue. It has the distinctive chaise longue feature of having both a back and an end. Or two backs, depending on how you look at it. SignaturePeter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org For an e-mail address, see my web page. > >>> Not quite. > >>> The French and Americans agree that the Le Corbusier thing [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > That second one doesn't look like any chaise longue I've ever seen. No, it's the Le Corbusier. (which is called a chaise lounge by Americans too) > Aha, but I see that they don't call it that. The web page identifies > it as a chaise lounge. That confirms something I've been suspecting > since this thread started: that a chaise longue and a chaise lounge > are entirely different items of furniture. You would be mistaken in that. Most European chaise longue -do- look like what you call a chaise lounge. There are a lot a fancy ones though that spell 'design' as if the designer aimed for a place in MOMA. > The "meridienne" you mentioned is a lot closer to what I'd call > a chaise longue. It has the distinctive chaise longue feature of > having both a back and an end. Or two backs, depending on how you > look at it. I really have no idea what distiguishes a French chaise longue and a meridienne. In most cases (but not all) these are just two different names for the same thing, Jan >>>> On 30 Aug 2009, the Omrud wrote >>>> [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > Chaise lounge: > http://rafflesfurnishings.com/catalog/images/01Synthetic%20/Greece%20Chaise%20Lo unge.jpg Well, fair enough, that chaise lounge is almost, but not entirely, unlike a chaise longue. > Chaise longue: > http://amazingemporium.com/shop/images/Monique%20Chaise%20Longue.jpg That, however, is a chaise longue. SignatureDavid >>>>> On 30 Aug 2009, the Omrud wrote >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > >That, however, is a chaise longue. I wa going to say that without the back it could be used as a psychiatrist's couch. But which part of a chaise longe is its back, the part against which the person's back might be resting, or the part on the long side, that is the part opposite the front from which a person would approach the seat? SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) On Aug 30, 5:21 pm, "Peter Duncanson (BrE)" <m...@peterduncanson.net> wrote: > On Sun, 30 Aug 2009 16:00:20 GMT, the Omrud > [quoted text clipped - 46 lines] > Peter Duncanson, UK > (in alt.usage.english) You might have your back against the part on the long side, if you want to sit up rather than recline. Hence, I'd say the back is "both bits". >>>>> On 30 Aug 2009, the Omrud wrote >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > > That, however, is a chaise longue. A piece of furniture can only be regarded as a chaise longue if it could accommodate hurly burly. SignatureLaura (emulate St. George for email) >>> On 30 Aug 2009, the Omrud wrote >>> [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > bother telling the clerk that "chaise lounge" is a "screaming error". > You won't be believed. Arguably, it's so common now that it's correct in America. Dictionaries of the future will point out that 'chaise lounge' is an adaptation of French 'chaise longue'. Instead of emphasis on the length of the chair, emphasis now applies to the comfort. SignatureJohn Dean Oxford >>>> On 30 Aug 2009, the Omrud wrote >>>> [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] >'chaise longue'. Instead of emphasis on the length of the chair, emphasis >now applies to the comfort. In the meantime, stores in Australia call them "chaises". No lounge no longue. Maybe this simple solution will win out. SignatureRichard Bollard Canberra Australia To email, I'm at AMT not spAMT. On 30 Aug 2009, tony cooper wrote >>> On 30 Aug 2009, the Omrud wrote >>> [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > one. Don't bother telling the clerk that "chaise lounge" is a > "screaming error". You won't be believed. Oh, no danger of that: I wouldn't correct someone if I heard them say "chaise lounge". But I'd definitely be thinking "Wow, is that wrong or is that wrong". SignatureCheers, Harvey CanEng and BrEng, indiscriminately mixed > Oh, no danger of that: I wouldn't correct someone if I heard them > say "chaise lounge". > But I'd definitely be thinking "Wow, is that wrong or is that > wrong". I first discovered this issue in the early '80s. Most authorities I consulted at that time regarded it as a lost cause in American English even then. A few retailers seemed to be aware that there was an issue and advertised "lounge chairs" and "loungers." But this only encouraged people to believe it really was "chase lounge" (as the TV pitchmen for retailers who did not give a damn pronounced it). SignatureLars Eighner <http://larseighner.com/> September 5843, 1993 222 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. Tony Cooper: > Absolutely. Until reading this thread, and looking up the term, it > never occurred to me that "chaise lounge" is in any way incorrect. I > would have thought "longue" was a typo. I think of "chaise lounge" as the normal prounciation and "chaise longue" as the spelling. But I never use the term myself. SignatureMark Brader | "You have seen this incident, based on sworn Toronto | testimony. Can you prove that it didn't happen?" msb@vex.net | -- Ed Wood, Plan 9 from Outer Space I just wrote: > I think of "chaise lounge" as the normal prounciation and "chaise longue" > as the spelling. But I never use the term myself. Hmm. I forgot that some people might not read "chaise" as anglicized French, in terms of pronunciation. Please read the above as: I think of "shayz lounge" as the normal prounciation and "chaise longue" as the spelling. But I never use the term myself. SignatureMark Brader, Toronto "More importantly, Mark is just plain wrong." msb@vex.net -- John Hollingsworth My text in this article is in the public domain. Mark Brader filted: >I just wrote: >> I think of "chaise lounge" as the normal prounciation and "chaise longue" [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > I think of "shayz lounge" as the normal prounciation and "chaise longue" > as the spelling. But I never use the term myself. "Chaise lounge" (pronounced "shayz lounge") is simply the English translation of the French "chaise longue".... I don't see why there's such a fuss about it...since when did we start pronouncing words we got from French in anything resembling the way the French pronounce them?...r SignatureA pessimist sees the glass as half empty. An optometrist asks whether you see the glass more full like this?...or like this? On 31 Aug 2009, R H Draney wrote > Mark Brader filted: >> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > "Chaise lounge" (pronounced "shayz lounge") is simply the > English translation of the French "chaise longue".... Am I being whooshed? "Longue" doesn't translate as "lounge" in any way other than anagrammatically. SignatureCheers, Harvey CanEng and BrEng, indiscriminately mixed Quoth HVS <usenet@REMOVETHISwhhvs.co.uk>, and I quote: >On 31 Aug 2009, R H Draney wrote > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >Am I being whooshed? "Longue" doesn't translate as "lounge" in any >way other than anagrammatically. But the term "chaise lounge" is very much in vouge at the moment. SignatureJames James Hogg filted: >Quoth HVS <usenet@REMOVETHISwhhvs.co.uk>, and I quote: > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >But the term "chaise lounge" is very much in vouge at the moment. It's a rouge pronunciation whose viability is hard to guage....r SignatureA pessimist sees the glass as half empty. An optometrist asks whether you see the glass more full like this?...or like this? > James Hogg filted: >> Quoth HVS and I quote: [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > It's a rouge pronunciation whose viability is hard to guage....r I nominate R. Draney and J. Hogg for the funniest-reply prize today (so far). What should the prize be called? The AUE Apple? The Daily Bon Mot? Got any suggestions? SignatureMaria Conlon > I nominate R. Draney and J. Hogg for the funniest-reply prize today (so > far). > > What should the prize be called? The AUE Apple? The Daily Bon Mot? Got > any suggestions? If it comes with virtual chocolates, it could be called the Bon-Bon Mot. S in B no idea why I have chocolates on the brain, no idea at all really Maria Conlon wrote: > I nominate R. Draney and J. Hogg for the funniest-reply prize today > (so > far). > > What should the prize be called? The AUE Apple? The Daily Bon Mot? Got > any suggestions? If it comes with virtual chocolates, it could be called the Bon-Bon Mot. S in B no idea why I have chocolates on the brain, no idea at all really Ooh, I like that. (People in AUE are so clever -- and that's one of the reasons why I've been reading the group ever since I discovered it (about 12 years ago).. SignatureMaria Conlon > Maria Conlon wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > the reasons why I've been reading the group ever since I discovered it > (about 12 years ago).. ------------- Does anyone know what the remedy is when one can't have Quote-Fix? (It's not available for Vista, as far as I know.) I try fixing the attributions, but it's a lot of work and errors are easily made. The above reply to Stephanie had been "fixed," but now, as I'm replying to it, I should fix it again. I won't though, for the sake of experiment. (It now shows her post and mine having the same attribution (>). This is getting old very fast.) Solutions? (I'm going to do some online checking about this again.) I suspect it's not just a lack of Quote-Fix, but more complicated. I'm using news.albasani.net. Do other users of n.a.n. have the same problem? SignatureMaria Conlon > Does anyone know what the remedy is when one can't have Quote-Fix? > (It's not available for Vista, as far as I know.) I try fixing the [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > I'm using news.albasani.net. Do other users of n.a.n. have the same > problem? I have seen messages in some forums that OE QuoteFix works with Live Mail (the Vista application). I still use Windows XP with OE, so I don't really know if it does. SignatureSkitt (AmE) >> Does anyone know what the remedy is when one can't have Quote-Fix? >> (It's not available for Vista, as far as I know.) I try fixing the [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > Mail (the Vista application). I still use Windows XP with OE, so I > don't really know if it does. Thanks, Skitt. I didn't know that about Live Mail. I am able to use it, but have been hesitant to do so. (Hesitant probably due to ignorance.) SignatureMaria Conlon [...] > Does anyone know what the remedy is when one can't have Quote-Fix? > (It's not available for Vista, as far as I know.) I try fixing the > attributions, but it's a lot of work and errors are easily made. [...] > Solutions? (I'm going to do some online checking about this again.) I > suspect it's not just a lack of Quote-Fix, but more complicated. > > I'm using news.albasani.net. Do other users of n.a.n. have the same > problem? I normally use Thunderbird, but I have Vista and Windows Mail, and I can confirm that OE-QuoteFix works perfectly well with Windows Mail. In fact, I'm using it now to answer you. Installing OE-QuoteFix will result in having "Outlook Express with OE-QuoteFix" showing in your programs, along with the familiar Outlook Express icon, instead of the Windows Mail icon. Don't let that faze you --I know it did me at first-- as the program opened will be Windows Mail, but a fixed Windows Mail. SignatureIsabelle Cecchini In alt.usage.english, tutu wrote: >I normally use Thunderbird, but I have Vista and Windows Mail, and I >can confirm that OE-QuoteFix works perfectly well with Windows Mail. I don't use any of those products, so I speak from a position of considerable ignorance, but what strikes me is this. OE has a number of obvious deficiencies that QuoteFix fixes. QuoteFix has been around for many years now and has gained widespread acceptance. Windows Mail is a new product that replaces OE. So why is QuoteFix necessary with Windows Mail? Microsoft have implemented the QuoteFix fixes in Windows Mail, haven't they? If not, why not? SignatureMike Barnes Cheshire, England Mike Barnes wrote, in <oQL8mT7SeinKFwO7@34klh41lk4h1lk34h3lk4h1k4.invalid> on Wed, 2 Sep 2009 09:06:42 +0100: > In alt.usage.english, tutu wrote: > >I normally use Thunderbird, but I have Vista and Windows Mail, and I [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > necessary with Windows Mail? Microsoft have implemented the QuoteFix > fixes in Windows Mail, haven't they? If not, why not? You are supposed to like the way they do it. SignatureNick Spalding BrE/IrE > In alt.usage.english, tutu wrote: >> I normally use Thunderbird, but I have Vista and Windows Mail, and I [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > QuoteFix necessary with Windows Mail? Microsoft have implemented the > QuoteFix fixes in Windows Mail, haven't they? If not, why not? Another thread about the type of questions asked in exams has prompted me to offer my own set of questions for the hopeful candidate to the aue comprehension proficiency test: 1) Right or Wrong: The author's "considerable ignorance" is not feigned.* Mike Barnes has been known to use irony. * That's actually trickier than it seems. A non-negligeable number of students are thrown when asked to react by Right or Wrong to assertions containing a negation. 2) Guided essay, to be graded in coursework: Find one instance of rhetorical questioning in the quoted paragraph. Is it used for irony or sarcasm? Discuss, bearing in mind the different acceptations of those two words in different parts of the English-speaking world. 3) Essay (final exam): Usenet, sandwiches, European road-signs, non-Windows OS, sb and sth, decimals and fractions. 4) Special essay for students of English syntax, advanced level: "Microsoft have ..." In what part(s) of the English-speaking world would that type of grammatical agreement be considered faulty? Bonus point awarded to those candidates who will be able to work in a clever pun about John Cleese. SignatureIsabelle Cecchini aka tutu > Tony Cooper: >> Absolutely. Until reading this thread, and looking up the term, it >> never occurred to me that "chaise lounge" is in any way incorrect. I [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > longue" > as the spelling. But I never use the term myself. Nor do I. We have two of those long-ish chair thingies on our deck, and don't call them anything in particular. If forced to come up with a name, I'd probably call them "lounges." One can "lounge" on them fairly well, especially when we put the cushions on them. But I am aware of the "chaise longue" vs "chaise lounge" controversy, and I don't use either term for anything. We don't have a chaise longue. Um, as far as I know, that is. We do have a long couch which, at one end, has a long seat. Here's a picture of something similar: http://blog.theavclub.tv/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/willingham_sectional.jpg or http://tinyurl.com/ltgloc I have no idea what the couch/sofa might be called other than a "sectional," perhaps. The "long chair" end can be separated from the rest. (My grandson used to like to use that part of the couch as a bed, but now he just uses one of the regular beds when he stays overnight.) SignatureMaria Conlon >>'Lounge' is an error, but a very common one. I get the impression that >>in the US 'lounge' is so common that many people assume it is correct. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > bother telling the clerk that "chaise lounge" is a "screaming error". > You won't be believed. There's a funny section in _The Life and Times of the Thunderbolt Kid_ in which Bill Bryson's father discovers that it's not actually "lounge" and goes around showing people. SignatureNam Sibbyllam quidem Cumis ego ipse oculis meis vidi in ampulla pendere, et cum illi pueri dicerent: beable beable beable; respondebat illa: doidy doidy doidy. [plorkwort] Cheryl filted: >> Burchfield notes that the "lounge" form "sometimes turns up" in AmE, >> "esp. in trade advertisements". "Sometimes"?... >> It's a screaming error, though. >> >'Lounge' is an error, but a very common one. I get the impression that >in the US 'lounge' is so common that many people assume it is correct. According to the spelling checker that comes with Newsguy, it *is* correct, and "longue" gets flagged as an error....r SignatureA pessimist sees the glass as half empty. An optometrist asks whether you see the glass more full like this?...or like this? >On 30 Aug 2009, the Omrud wrote > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > >It's a screaming error, though. It's what Bill Bryson's mother used to say (in 'The Thunderbolt Kid'). <http://www.booksattransworld.co.uk/billbryson/thunderboltHome.html> SignatureIan > > I thought the words came straight out of the French - chaise longue. > > But everyone I hear, even a teacher-friend who knows some French, > > calls it a chaise lounge. > > I've never heard that in British English, where "chaise longue" is normal. American usage is so different that "chaise lounge" has by now become a standard American phrase. In furniture stores many chairs built to encourage reclining are called lounges or loungers, chaise lounge in full. (A British lounge is a room, a British lounger is a person.) SignatureDon Phillipson Carlsbad Springs (Ottawa, Canada) >>> I thought the words came straight out of the French - chaise longue. >>> But everyone I hear, even a teacher-friend who knows some French, [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > loungers, chaise lounge in full. (A British lounge is a room, a > British lounger is a person.) "Lounge chair" is a common term in AusE, but it's not the same as a chaise longue. SignaturePeter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org For an e-mail address, see my web page. >> > I thought the words came straight out of the French - chaise longue. >> > But everyone I hear, even a teacher-friend who knows some French, [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >loungers, chaise lounge in full. (A British lounge is a room, a >British lounger is a person.) Until today I have not noticed "chaise lounge" spelled or pronounced another way, but the COD10 notes that it is the US term for chaise longue. Whoop-de-do, yet another AmE, BrE thingummy. SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs, who speaks AmE, lives near Dublin, Ireland and usually spells in BrE Kalmia wrote, in <fac0f65a-3bfc-4502-ab9a-6e56d160bb35@y20g2000vbk.googlegroups.com> on Sun, 30 Aug 2009 06:06:21 -0700 (PDT): > I thought the words came straight out of the French - chaise longue. > But everyone I hear, even a teacher-friend who knows some French, > calls it a chaise lounge. They're wrong. SignatureNick Spalding BrE/IrE > Kalmia wrote, in > <fac0f65a-3bfc-4502-ab9a-6e56d160b...@y20g2000vbk.googlegroups.com> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Nick Spalding > BrE/IrE Yeah, BUT dare to correct 'em. It would get the same reception as an attempt to correct 'not my FOR-tay.' Some pills ya just hafta swaller. If you REALLY want to get sick --I saw on a tee shirt back : GOT-R-DID Try explaining that to someone who's learning English. Oh, how I love- hate the American vernacular. In our last episode, <6f452545-20ee-4a12-8766-908eed2fa64b@l34g2000vba.googlegroups.com>, the lovely and talented Kalmia broadcast on alt.usage.english: >> Kalmia wrote, in >> <fac0f65a-3bfc-4502-ab9a-6e56d160b...@y20g2000vbk.googlegroups.com> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >> Nick Spalding >> BrE/IrE > Yeah, BUT dare to correct 'em. It would get the same reception as an > attempt to correct 'not my FOR-tay.' Some pills ya just hafta > swaller. > If you REALLY want to get sick --I saw on a tee shirt back : > GOT-R-DID > Try explaining that to someone who's learning English. Oh, how I love- > hate the American vernacular. Wait until you are told: "Oh, you mean pa-TEEN-a. It's pronounced pa-TEEN-a." SignatureLars Eighner <http://larseighner.com/> September 5843, 1993 222 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. >> Try explaining that to someone who's learning English. Oh, how I >> love-hate the American vernacular. > > Wait until you are told: "Oh, you mean pa-TEEN-a. It's pronounced > pa-TEEN-a." Is that another case of us keeping the old form and Brits changing or was our pronunciation a conscious attempt to get closer to Italian? SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |It is one thing to be mistaken; it is 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |quite another to be willfully Palo Alto, CA 94304 |ignorant | Cecil Adams kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com (650)857-7572 http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ >>> Try explaining that to someone who's learning English. Oh, how I >>> love-hate the American vernacular. >> >> Wait until you are told: "Oh, you mean pa-TEEN-a. It's pronounced >> pa-TEEN-a." > Is that another case of us keeping the old form and Brits changing or > was our pronunciation a conscious attempt to get closer to Italian? Evidently, if the Italians have the accent on the penult, it is they who weren't adhering to the old form. SignatureLars Eighner <http://larseighner.com/> September 5844, 1993 223 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. >> Wait until you are told: "Oh, you mean pa-TEEN-a. It's pronounced >> pa-TEEN-a." > > Is that another case of us keeping the old form and Brits changing or > was our pronunciation a conscious attempt to get closer to Italian? Merriam-Webster Online has the pronunciation both ways. (Which reminds me of the saying, "You pays yer money and you takes yer choice.") I think I say the word in question as "pa-TEEN-a." However, there's a good chance I've never said the word aloud. That is, I may mentally pronounce it as "pa-TEEN-a." (Is it patina or is it -- sometimes -- crud?) SignatureMaria Conlon [...] > (Is it patina or is it -- sometimes -- crud?) I believe patina is generally green and crud is generally brown. If left long enough, crud may acquire a patina of its own. SignatureLes (BrE) Quoth "Maria Conlon" <conlonmaria@sbcglobal.net>, and I quote: >>> Wait until you are told: "Oh, you mean pa-TEEN-a. It's pronounced >>> pa-TEEN-a." [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > >(Is it patina or is it -- sometimes -- crud?) The OED mentions a definition of the French "patine" as "grime that accumulates on old pictures". Grime is in the same semantic field as "crud", which in turn is defined as "An undesirable impurity, foreign matter, etc." Some people might not find a patina "undesirable". The word doesn't have the negative charge of grime and crud. Of course, I may be skating on thin ice with this patinage. SignatureJames >Quoth "Maria Conlon" <conlonmaria@sbcglobal.net>, and I quote: > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > >Of course, I may be skating on thin ice with this patinage. COD says, of patina: 1 a green or brown film on the surface of old bronze. 2 a sheen on wooden furniture produced by age and polishing. 3 any distinctive surface appearance acquired over time. I've always mainly associated it with the green gunk that forms on alloys containing copper. SignatureRobin (BrE) Herts, England >On Tue, 01 Sep 2009 21:38:59 +0200, James Hogg <Jas.Hogg@gOUTmail.com> >wrote: [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] >I've always mainly associated it with the green gunk that forms on >alloys containing copper. Verdigris, or the extreme unction of opera buffs. SignaturePaul > COD says, of patina: > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > I've always mainly associated it with the green gunk that forms on > alloys containing copper. I call the latter verdigris. My first thought when I see/hear patina is meaning 2 above, so I tend to think of it as a Good Thing. SignatureRob Bannister >> COD says, of patina: >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >> I've always mainly associated it with the green gunk that forms on >> alloys containing copper. > I call the latter verdigris. My first thought when I see/hear patina is > meaning 2 above, so I tend to think of it as a Good Thing. No. 1 is generally regarded as a good thing. When I was but a lad, the city fathers of Houston thought it was a sad thing that the equestrian statue of Sam Houston had become all green and everything. They had it sandblasted and finish in some new plastic coating to prevent regreeness. You do not want your monumental statues to gleam like a new penny. Trust me. SignatureLars Eighner <http://larseighner.com/> September 5845, 1993 224 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. > >> COD says, of patina: > >> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > No. 1 is generally regarded as a good thing. As is frequently mentioned on "Antiques Roadshow". Removing the patina from copper-based items hurts value. The same is not true for silver. I guess tarnish is not valued the way patina is. Brian SignatureDay 212 of the "no grouchy usenet posts" project Default User filted: >> >> COD says, of patina: >> >> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >from copper-based items hurts value. The same is not true for silver. I >guess tarnish is not valued the way patina is. I suspect that this is because oxides of silver don't protect the underlying metal from further deterioration as do oxides of copper....r SignatureA pessimist sees the glass as half empty. An optometrist asks whether you see the glass more full like this?...or like this? > > >> COD says, of patina: > > >> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > from copper-based items hurts value. The same is not true for silver. I > guess tarnish is not valued the way patina is. Depends on what the object is. Spoons, yes. Sculptured objects shouldn't glitter like new, Jan >>> COD says, of patina: >>> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > to prevent regreeness. You do not want your monumental statues to gleam > like a new penny. Trust me. Perhaps not on a statue, but I am very impressed by a Greek church near me that has had its roof domes redone with presumably treated copper that gleams magnificently, especially when the sun is setting. SignatureRob Bannister >>>> COD says, of patina: >>>> [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] >me that has had its roof domes redone with presumably treated copper >that gleams magnificently, especially when the sun is setting. An exceptional dome, designed by Mr Jefferson, I believe, on the grounds of the University of Virginia: http://www.arch.virginia.edu/archive/ded7y/vs98/RCstudy1.htm SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs, who speaks AmE, lives near Dublin, Ireland and usually spells in BrE Chuck Riggs filted: >>Perhaps not on a statue, but I am very impressed by a Greek church near >>me that has had its roof domes redone with presumably treated copper [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >http://www.arch.virginia.edu/archive/ded7y/vs98/RCstudy1.htm Here's a copper dome close to home that hasn't gone green: http://www.havasuchamber.com/images/Az_State_Capitol_dome.jpg ....r SignatureA pessimist sees the glass as half empty. An optometrist asks whether you see the glass more full like this?...or like this? > Chuck Riggs filted: >> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > ....r Here's another copper dome of some architectural significance -- actually an eighth of a sphere. It has gone green, though it was grey to black for about 30 years until they finally wised up and put on the copper roof as the architect had originally specified instead of the cheaper metal (lead?) cladding it was built with -- at which point the roof _finally_ stopped falling apart and leaking. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kresge_Auditorium SignatureRoland Hutchinson He calls himself "the Garden State's leading violist da gamba," ... comparable to being ruler of an exceptionally small duchy. --Newark (NJ) Star Ledger ( http://tinyurl.com/RolandIsNJ ) [...] > Here's another copper dome of some architectural significance -- > actually an eighth of a sphere. It has gone green, though it was [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kresge_Auditorium That's beautiful indeed. Lead's expensive, though, so I suspect the leaky covering may have been zinc-plated steel. Have a look at my favourite glass one (the biggest single-span glasshouse in the world, apparently): http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/1039944 and http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/834253 I suppose I ought to find it out of keeping with the landscape, but I don't. SignatureMike. R H Draney wrote, in <h7on6k0309j@drn.newsguy.com> on 3 Sep 2009 08:26:12 -0700: > Chuck Riggs filted: > > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > http://www.havasuchamber.com/images/Az_State_Capitol_dome.jpg Copper domes are *supposed* to go green. SignatureNick Spalding BrE/IrE > R H Draney wrote, in <h7on6k0309j@drn.newsguy.com> > on 3 Sep 2009 08:26:12 -0700: [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Copper domes are *supposed* to go green. Hmm... If you've got no way of preventing this happening, then yes, but people don't let that happen to their copper kettles and saucepans, and I find these newly-appearing treated copper roofs that actually look like copper very appealing. SignatureRob Bannister >R H Draney wrote, in <h7on6k0309j@drn.newsguy.com> > on 3 Sep 2009 08:26:12 -0700: [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > >Copper domes are *supposed* to go green. For those of us who enjoy beating Mother Nature, there are many effective ways to clean and polish both copper and brass. SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs, who speaks AmE, lives near Dublin, Ireland and usually spells in BrE >For those of us who enjoy beating Mother Nature, there are many >effective ways to clean and polish both copper and brass. Those of us who spent our military careers in a day when shiney brass was required for all uniform hardware are well aware of the ways to clean and polish brass. Signature************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * >>For those of us who enjoy beating Mother Nature, there are many >>effective ways to clean and polish both copper and brass. > >Those of us who spent our military careers in a day when shiney >brass was required for all uniform hardware are well aware of the >ways to clean and polish brass. Then you can probably master cooper. SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs, who speaks AmE, lives near Dublin, Ireland and usually spells in BrE >>>> COD says, of patina: >>>> [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] >me that has had its roof domes redone with presumably treated copper >that gleams magnificently, especially when the sun is setting. I have a distant memory of a mid-to-late 20C building in London (UK) that had a copper roof. The architect had expected it to turn a tasteful green colour. He had not analysed the air in the area. It turned black. SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) >>>>> COD says, of patina: >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > that had a copper roof. The architect had expected it to turn a tasteful > green colour. He had not analysed the air in the area. It turned black. Here is a picture of the tower on the Said Business School. http://www.urban75.org/photos/oxon/oxon001.html I see it is described on this page as "bonkers". When the building was apparently complete I committed a dreadful faux-pas by asking the then dean when the scaffolding would be removed from the tower: "That, Laura, *is* the tower", he replied rather acidly. I didn't dare ask what it was made of. SignatureLaura (emulate St. George for email) LFS filted: >Here is a picture of the tower on the Said Business School. > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >I didn't dare ask what it was made of. If it makes you feel any better, he probably dined out on that story thenceforward....r SignatureA pessimist sees the glass as half empty. An optometrist asks whether you see the glass more full like this?...or like this? [...] > Here is a picture of the tower on the Said Business School. > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > I didn't dare ask what it was made of. Egad! It's a copper ziggurat! People do tend to perpetrate hommages to the spires in the most inharmonious manner: consider Nuffield. SignatureMike. Mike Lyle filted: >> Here is a picture of the tower on the Said Business School. >> >> http://www.urban75.org/photos/oxon/oxon001.html > >Egad! It's a copper ziggurat! People do tend to perpetrate hommages to >the spires in the most inharmonious manner: consider Nuffield. Well, as long as we're looking for such things: http://www.davidharbersundials.co.uk/images/sundials/copperObelisk.jpg An image search on "copper stele" gets me pictures of Buddhist monks..."copper ziggurat" itself yields half-naked women....r SignatureA pessimist sees the glass as half empty. An optometrist asks whether you see the glass more full like this?...or like this? >Mike Lyle filted: >> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > http://www.davidharbersundials.co.uk/images/sundials/copperObelisk.jpg Oi! David Harber's my neighbour-but-one. I'm sure I could creep out and vandalise that object right now, if I'd a mind to. We're frightfully avant-garde with our gardening around here, I'll have you know. >An image search on "copper stele" gets me pictures of Buddhist monks..."copper >ziggurat" itself yields half-naked women....r None of /those/, I'm glad to say. SignaturePaul Paul Wolff: > Oi! David Harber's my neighbour-but-one. ... To me "neighbor" includes anyone living within a short distance of where I do, so it doesn't make sense to modify it with "but one". To get the more specific sort of meaning that that would imply, I would say there has to be an additional specification, like "next-door neighbor", "back-to-back neighbor", or "neighbor across the street". Others? SignatureMark Brader | Well, unfortunately, that is impossible, or very difficult, or Toronto | highly inadvisable, or would require legislation--one of those. msb@vex.net | -- Sir Humphrey ("Yes Minister", Lynn & Jay) My text in this article is in the public domain. >Paul Wolff: >> Oi! David Harber's my neighbour-but-one. ... [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >Others? To me, "my neighbour-but-one" clearly means the neighbour next to my next-door neighbour: "my next-door neighbour's next-door neighbour". Would it be clearer as "my next-door-neighbour-but-one? To me, the phrase "but-one" in "my neighbour-but-one" implies a measure of nearness. Of course, in a rural or other setting where the houses are sparsely scattered the nearest neighbour might be on the opposite side of the road or even on a different road nearby amd the next nearest, the "neighbour-but-one", might be on the same road as the speaker's house but a greater distance away. SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) Paul Wolff: >>> Oi! David Harber's my neighbour-but-one. ... Mark Brader: >> To me "neighbor" includes anyone living within a short distance of >> where I do, so it doesn't make sense to modify it with "but one". >> To get the more specific sort of meaning that that would imply, >> I would say there has to be an additional specification, like >> "next-door neighbor", "back-to-back neighbor", or "neighbor across >> the street". Peter Duncanson: > To me, "my neighbour-but-one" clearly means the neighbour next to my > next-door neighbour: "my next-door neighbour's next-door neighbour". Okay, so in that sentence you're using "neighbor" the way I would, *except* the first time. > Would it be clearer as "my next-door-neighbour-but-one? It was clear the first time, but that would fit better with my usage. > To me, the phrase "but-one" in "my neighbour-but-one" implies a measure > of nearness. What it implies to me is that the thing you're attaching it to already has a definite cutoff point, which doesn't fit with my use of "neighbor". SignatureMark Brader, Toronto | Remember, folks, determinism is your *friend*! msb@vex.net | (Or is that "Your friend is deterministic"?) My text in this article is in the public domain. >> Paul Wolff: >>> Oi! David Harber's my neighbour-but-one. ... [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > "neighbour-but-one", might be on the same road as the speaker's house > but a greater distance away. I was confused in my first year in Australia in an outback community where people spoke of neighbours who lived anything up to 150 miles away. SignatureRob Bannister >> I have a distant memory of a mid-to-late 20C building in London (UK) >> that had a copper roof. The architect had expected it to turn a tasteful [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > dean when the scaffolding would be removed from the tower: "That, Laura, > *is* the tower", he replied rather acidly. I had a similar reaction when I first saw the Paris gas works. http://tinyurl.com/lh3obf SignaturePeter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org For an e-mail address, see my web page. > >> I have a distant memory of a mid-to-late 20C building in London (UK) > >> that had a copper roof. The architect had expected it to turn a tasteful [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > http://tinyurl.com/lh3obf It's called 'structural exhibitionism', Jan > Here is a picture of the tower on the Said Business School. > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > I didn't dare ask what it was made of. We took our children up the Eiffel Tower when they were about four and two years old. Daughter, the older, looked carefully at the view of Paris, and then cast her eyes over the tower (we now know that she would go on to qualify as a Civil Engineer). She then uttered this immortal question: - But, Daddy, why is it an awful tower? SignatureDavid [...] > We took our children up the Eiffel Tower when they were about four and > two years old. Daughter, the older, looked carefully at the view of [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > - But, Daddy, why is it an awful tower? Because it's an eyeful. Is there anything left of the foundations they laid at Wembley for one that was going to be taller than the French one, but never got off the ground? SignatureMike. > [...] >> We took our children up the Eiffel Tower when they were about four and [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Because it's an eyeful. Some French geezer, I forget who, insisted on lunching on the Eiffel Tower, even though he hated it. He explained that it was the only place in Paris where he was sure not to be able to see it. Me, I like it. I first went up when I was about 12 in 1968. > Is there anything left of the foundations they laid at Wembley for one > that was going to be taller than the French one, but never got off the > ground? That is London stuff - we Midlanders don't bother ourselves with such things. SignatureDavid [...] > > Is there anything left of the foundations they laid at Wembley for one > > that was going to be taller than the French one, but never got off the > > ground? > > That is London stuff - we Midlanders don't bother ourselves with such > things. Well said. That one planned for Moscow, though ... The foundations became a swimming pool. They're probably a Walmart now. -- VB (Google is being creative again. Please forgive any duplicates.) > [...] > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > That one planned for Moscow, though ... The foundations became a > swimming pool. They're probably a Walmart now. It's amazing how things like this can come and go with hardly anyone now aware of them: http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/~dstewart/tower.htm SignatureOnline waterways route planner: http://canalplan.org.uk development version: http://canalplan.eu >> [...] >> [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > >http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/~dstewart/tower.htm Quoting: During the construction of the Tower six workmen were killed and another seriously injured either though falls or accidents. The falls were not accidents? SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) >>> [...] >>> [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > The falls were not accidents? They rarely are in building. Construction sites are notoriously unsafe, and safety regulations seem to make the situation worse by just complicating matters. SignatureRob Bannister >>>> [...] >>>> [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] >and safety regulations seem to make the situation worse by just >complicating matters. Construction sites may be "notoriously unsafe", but fatal accidents are now very rare. In the 19th century, before those regulations you disapprove of, it was taken for granted that any substantial construction project would involve deaths. And to me any death which is not intentional is accidental; negligence may controdute to such accidents, but they are accidents nonetheless. SignatureDon Aitken Mail to the From: address is not read. To email me, substitute "clara.co.uk" for "freeuk.com" >>>>> [...] >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > is not intentional is accidental; negligence may controdute to such > accidents, but they are accidents nonetheless. If where you live deaths are rare, then you are very lucky. There are hundreds of deaths in Australia each year on construction sites. Whether these are mainly due to negligent management or careless workmen will probably never be clear - I have no sympathy with our belligerent construction unions, nor with the money-at-all-costs bosses; the truth is always obfuscated by loud posturing. SignatureRob Bannister > It's amazing how things like this can come and go with hardly anyone now > aware of them: > > http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/~dstewart/tower.htm I'd never even heard of New Brighton. -- VB Mike Lyle: > Is there anything left of the foundations they laid at Wembley for one > that was going to be taller than the French one, but never got off the > ground? Watkin's tower (named for the promoter, not the designer -- Watkin was the chairman of the Metropolitan Railway), on the site later used for Wembley Stadium. Wikipedia links to this article http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/2006/mar/14/architecture.communities which, after saying 1864 when it obviously means 1863, goes on to say that when the level of the pitch (US: field) was being lowered for the rebuilding of the stadium, the tower's concrete foundations were exposed. This seems to imply that they would then have to have been demolished, but not necessarily so -- it might have sufficed to remove the topmost part of them. (The tower itself, what was built of it, was demolished in 1907.) SignatureMark Brader, Toronto "Yet Another Wonderful Novelty -- YAWN!" msb@vex.net -- Liam Quin My text in this article is in the public domain. On Sep 3, 5:32 pm, "Peter Duncanson (BrE)" <m...@peterduncanson.net> wrote: > I have a distant memory of a mid-to-late 20C building in London (UK) > that had a copper roof. The architect had expected it to turn a tasteful > green colour. He had not analysed the air in the area. It turned black. I believe something similar happened to a building at Cornell in the 1970s. It was meant to turn -- some colour -- but the (copper-based?? no idea really) paint simply kept sort of dripping down the building. I remember someone telling me it was because the paint was designed for major urban areas and Ithaca was too clean... but this could all have been a bad joke, I have no real evidence. But -- wait, I do! The following is from a geology course paper now on line: "Uris Hall (not to be confused with Uris Library) was built in 1972 from a somewhat unusual steel. This metal is an alloy of iron, manganese, copper, nickel, and chromium. It was designed to combine with sulfur in the atmosphere and produce a tough, tightly- bonded layer of iron oxide (rust). The rusty layer was intended as a substitute for paint on the building’s exterior. Any small scratch paints itself over automatically. It was not intended for the rusty layer to be quite so watersoluble and paint the surrounding concrete." Isabelle might enjoy having her hypothetical aue competency students parse the degree of sarcasm in that last sentence. best from Brussels, Stephanie >On Sep 3, 5:32 pm, "Peter Duncanson (BrE)" <m...@peterduncanson.net> >wrote: [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >rusty layer to be quite so watersoluble >and paint the surrounding concrete." "The best laid schemes o' Mice an' Men, gang aft agley." In this instance "agley" can be roughly translated as gloopy-droopy. >Isabelle might enjoy having her hypothetical aue competency students >parse the degree of sarcasm in that last sentence. > >best from Brussels, >Stephanie SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) > On Sep 3, 5:32 pm, "Peter Duncanson (BrE)" <m...@peterduncanson.net> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > Isabelle might enjoy having her hypothetical aue competency students > parse the degree of sarcasm in that last sentence. The word to look for is Cor-Ten steel or just corten steel. It forms an oxidation layer that (unlike ordinary steel) that completely closes off the underlying metal, stopping further oxidation. (like aluminum oxide does) It doesn't always quite work as intended. Once you know what to look for you can see examples in many places, Jan > If you REALLY want to get sick --I saw on a tee shirt back : > > GOT-R-DID > > Try explaining that to someone who's learning English. Oh, how I love- > hate the American vernacular. I must be slow this morning. What does it mean? SignaturePeter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org For an e-mail address, see my web page. >> If you REALLY want to get sick --I saw on a tee shirt back : >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > I must be slow this morning. What does it mean? I had to google it myself. "Got her did" -- in standard English, "I have got it done". The past tense of "Get r done", a catchphrase in the vocabulary of the "redneck" character Larry The Cable Guy. SignatureRoland Hutchinson He calls himself "the Garden State's leading violist da gamba," ... comparable to being ruler of an exceptionally small duchy. --Newark (NJ) Star Ledger ( http://tinyurl.com/RolandIsNJ ) > >> If you REALLY want to get sick --I saw on a tee shirt back : > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > ... comparable to being ruler of an exceptionally small duchy. > --Newark (NJ) Star Ledger (http://tinyurl.com/RolandIsNJ) Oh....forgot to say that under it was printed: Blue Collar Thang >>> If you REALLY want to get sick --I saw on a tee shirt back : >>> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >tense of "Get r done", a catchphrase in the vocabulary of the "redneck" >character Larry The Cable Guy. Older North Americans may remember the Red Skelto radio program and his character The Mean Little Boy, where he made a national catchphrase of "I dood it". Signature************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * >>>> If you REALLY want to get sick --I saw on a tee shirt back : >>>> [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > and his character The Mean Little Boy, where he made a national > catchphrase of "I dood it". What a revoltin' development that was. SignatureFrank ess > What a revoltin' development that was. 1313 Blue View Terrace I wish they'd rerun those L of R episodes. >>>>> If you REALLY want to get sick --I saw on a tee shirt back : >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > >What a revoltin' development that was. That, of course, was William Bendix. Signature************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * > "Frank ess" wrote: >>> Roland Hutchinson wrote: >>>> Peter Moylan wrote: >>>>>> If you REALLY want to get sick --I saw on a tee shirt back : >>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > That, of course, was William Bendix. Jackie Gleason in Life of Riley, I believe. SignatureSkitt (AmE) >> "Frank ess" wrote: >>>> Roland Hutchinson wrote: [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > >Jackie Gleason in Life of Riley, I believe. You must be a youngster. That was television. Bendix origniated the role on radio and played the role in a 1949 movie The Life of Riley [my misspelling corrected]. Signature************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * >>>>>>>> If you REALLY want to get sick --I saw on a tee shirt back : >>>>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > on radio and played the role in a 1949 movie The Life of Riley [my > misspelling corrected]. Quoth Wikipedia, s.v. William Bendix: "Bendix was also well known in that era for his radio work, starring as "Chester A. Riley" in the radio situation comedy series The Life of Riley from 1944 through 1951. He also played the title role in the second television version of the series, which ran from 1953 to 1958 (Jackie Gleason played Riley in a short-lived 1949 version)." There are further details in the article "Life of Riley" SignatureRoland Hutchinson He calls himself "the Garden State's leading violist da gamba," ... comparable to being ruler of an exceptionally small duchy. --Newark (NJ) Star Ledger ( http://tinyurl.com/RolandIsNJ ) >>> "Frank ess" wrote: >>>>> Roland Hutchinson wrote: [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >> >>Jackie Gleason in Life of Riley, I believe. > You must be a youngster. That was television. Bendix origniated > the role on radio and played the role in a 1949 movie The Life of > Riley [my misspelling corrected]. He played the role on TV too. I never heard of Gleason playing the role. SignatureLars Eighner <http://larseighner.com/> September 5844, 1993 223 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. > Hatunen broadcast: >>>>> What a revoltin' development that was. >>>> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > He played the role on TV too. I never heard of Gleason playing the > role. See http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0041036/ SignatureSkitt (AmE) > "Skitt" wrote: >>>> What a revoltin' development that was. >>> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > the role on radio and played the role in a 1949 movie The Life of > Riley [my misspelling corrected]. No youngster, but I didn't arrive on these shores until mid-1949. SignatureSkitt (AmE) > > If you REALLY want to get sick --I saw on a tee shirt back : > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > I must be slow this morning. What does it mean? Mission accomplished. >> Kalmia wrote, in >> <fac0f65a-3bfc-4502-ab9a-6e56d160b...@y20g2000vbk.googlegroups.com> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > attempt to correct 'not my FOR-tay.' Some pills ya just hafta > swaller. . . . A chaise lounge is an item that may be included in a suit of furniture. Back when I was starting in radio, the Program Director chastised me for saying "suite" in a furniture-store ad, explaining that none of the customers would have the slightest idea what a suite of furniture might be (but they knew well what a suit of furniture typically included). SignatureCordially, Eric Walker, Owlcroft House http://owlcroft.com/english/ >>> Kalmia wrote, in >>> <fac0f65a-3bfc-4502-ab9a-6e56d160b...@y20g2000vbk.googlegroups.com> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >customers would have the slightest idea what a suite of furniture might >be (but they knew well what a suit of furniture typically included). "Suite" and "suit" are pretty much the same word. Signature************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * Eric Walker: >> Back when I was starting in radio, the Program Director chastised me for >> saying "suite" in a furniture-store ad... Dave Hatunen: > "Suite" and "suit" are pretty much the same word. Well, except for the spelling, the pronunciation, and the meaning. SignatureMark Brader | "Don't you ever want to change your life? Toronto | "You talk about life as if it was something you buy msb@vex.net | in the shops: 'I'm sorry, but when I got it home, | it didn't suit me.'" -- Butterflies > Eric Walker: >>> Back when I was starting in radio, the Program Director chastised me for [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Well, except for the spelling, the pronunciation, and the meaning. Yes, but apart from the aqueducts ... SignaturePeter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org For an e-mail address, see my web page. > Eric Walker: > >> Back when I was starting in radio, the Program Director chastised [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Well, except for the spelling, the pronunciation, and the meaning. Are you sure about that? Have you reviewed the definitions of the two words? Brian SignatureDay 209 of the "no grouchy usenet posts" project >> Eric Walker: >> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Are you sure about that? Have you reviewed the definitions of the two > words? While they ultimately derive from the same sources, that does not make them synonyms. One does not refer to the red and black suites of cards, one does not wear a suite of clothes, one does not occupy a suit of rooms, and so on and so forth. A suit of furniture is a gross but regionally common (in certain regions of the U.S., notably the South) error for the wanted word "suite". And there's an *end* on't. SignatureCordially, Eric Walker, Owlcroft House http://owlcroft.com/english/ >>> Eric Walker: >>> [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > And there's an *end* on't. Well, I heard from a radio commercial in Little Rock, Arkansas, 1957, that you could find a wide selection of "bedroom suits" in a particular department store. Prices were quite high for pyjamas, I thought. SignatureFrank ess > >> Eric Walker: > > > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > While they ultimately derive from the same sources, that does not > make them synonyms. I didn't say they were. That wasn't what was said though. They are pretty much the same word, which just had a bit of differentiation. > A suit of furniture is a gross but > regionally common (in certain regions of the U.S., notably the South) > error for the wanted word "suite". That's your opinion. Regardless of the "merit", the pronounciation is in use, especially for the original case under discussion. Brian SignatureDay 210 of the "no grouchy usenet posts" project >Eric Walker: >>> Back when I was starting in radio, the Program Director chastised me for [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Well, except for the spelling, the pronunciation, and the meaning. Each has a number of meanings which are very similar, and www.dictionary.com has a definition under each which synonymizes it with the other. Signature************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * > On Mon, 31 Aug 2009 01:34:11 +0000 (UTC), Eric Walker > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > "Suite" and "suit" are pretty much the same word. I filed a trademark application about 25 years ago in China that mentioned 'tracksuits' as articles of apparel... we received a puzzled inquiry from an official about what a 'track suite' might be.... [...] > A chaise lounge is an item that may be included in a suit of furniture. > > Back when I was starting in radio, the Program Director chastised me for > saying "suite" in a furniture-store ad, explaining that none of the > customers would have the slightest idea what a suite of furniture might > be (but they knew well what a suit of furniture typically included). I can't recall seeing or hearing "chaise lounge" in BrE, nor "suit" for furniture. Alan Jones > [...] >> A chaise lounge is an item that may be included in a suit of furniture. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > I can't recall seeing or hearing "chaise lounge" in BrE, nor "suit" for > furniture. I've just checked OneLook, which seems to have a bias towards US dictionaries, and I couldn't find any definition of "suit" that could be applied to furniture. I did, however, find something that I hadn't known: "suit" is derived ultimately from Latin "sequitur", which means much the same as "suite". SignaturePeter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org For an e-mail address, see my web page. Peter wrote on Mon, 31 Aug 2009 22:42:11 +1000: >> [...] >>> A chaise lounge is an item that may be included in a suit of [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >> I can't recall seeing or hearing "chaise lounge" in BrE, nor "suit" >> for furniture. I'm pleased to see that the OED has not admitted "chaise lounge" but you can see how the mistake arises even in one of the references: "1826 DISRAELI Viv. Grey (1868) 338 Stiff or stretching, lounging on a chaise-longue. " SignatureJames Silverton Potomac, Maryland Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not Quoth "James Silverton" <not.jim.silverton@verizon.net>, and I quote: > Peter wrote on Mon, 31 Aug 2009 22:42:11 +1000: > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >DISRAELI Viv. Grey (1868) 338 Stiff or stretching, lounging on a >chaise-longue. " Disraeli got it right: http://www.archive.org/stream/viviangrey00disrgoog#page/n565/mode/1up but some subsequent editions (including the one at Gutenberg) have changed it to "chaise-lounge": http://books.google.com/books?id=dXU4AAAAIAAJ&q=chaise-lounge&dq=chaise-lounge&l r=&as_drrb_is=b&as_minm_is=0&as_miny_is=1800&as_maxm_is=0&as_maxy_is=1930&as_brr =0&ei=vNqbSvyWOqbAygT-oqj3Dg or http://tinyurl.com/l6gjuv SignatureJames > Quoth "James Silverton" <not.jim.silverton@verizon.net>, and I > quote: [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > but some subsequent editions (including the one at Gutenberg) > have changed it to "chaise-lounge": I'm not so sure. The edition you point to is from 1859. The earliest one I find on Google Books, from 1837, has it both ways: The others were only awkward copies of an easy original; and among them, stiff or stretching, lounging on a chaise-longue, or posted against the wall, Vivian's quick eye recognized more than one of the unhappy votaries of white hats lined with crimson. [p. 224] The young lady soon observed Vivian; and saying, without the least embarrasment, hat she was delighted to see him, she begged him to share her chaise-lounge. [p. 260] http://books.google.com/books?id=P0TOAAAAMAAJ and some later editions follow suit. > http://books.google.com/books?id=dXU4AAAAIAAJ&q=chaise-lounge&dq=chaise-lounge&l r=&as_drrb_is=b&as_minm_is=0&as_miny_is=1800&as_maxm_is=0&as_maxy_is=1930&as_brr =0&ei=vNqbSvyWOqbAygT-oqj3Dg > or > http://tinyurl.com/l6gjuv SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |"The Dynamics of Interbeing and 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |Monological Imperatives in 'Dick Palo Alto, CA 94304 |and Jane' : A Study in Psychic |Transrelational Modes." kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com | Calvin (650)857-7572 http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ Quoth Evan Kirshenbaum <kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com>, and I quote: >> Quoth "James Silverton" <not.jim.silverton@verizon.net>, and I >> quote: [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > >and some later editions follow suit. Interesting. I like to think that Disraeli knew how to spell the word and that the mistake is due to compositors and proofreaders. In any case, it's not the first French word to be mangled in English. Look what we have done with "footing" since we borrowed it! SignatureJames > > I can't recall seeing or hearing "chaise lounge" in BrE, nor "suit" > > for furniture. > > I've just checked OneLook, which seems to have a bias towards US > dictionaries, and I couldn't find any definition of "suit" that could > be applied to furniture. Take a look at "suite". Most dictionaries provide the "suit" pronunctiation as a variant. Brian SignatureDay 210 of the "no grouchy usenet posts" project >>> I can't recall seeing or hearing "chaise lounge" in BrE, nor "suit" >>> for furniture. >> I've just checked OneLook, which seems to have a bias towards US >> dictionaries, and I couldn't find any definition of "suit" that could >> be applied to furniture. > > Take a look at "suite". Most dictionaries provide the "suit" > pronunctiation as a variant. I see your point. So the answer seems to be that the "suit" _pronunciation_ is used in some areas. I was looking at the spelling. SignaturePeter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org For an e-mail address, see my web page. >>>> I can't recall seeing or hearing "chaise lounge" in BrE, nor "suit" >>>> for furniture. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >I see your point. So the answer seems to be that the "suit" >_pronunciation_ is used in some areas. I was looking at the spelling. It would be only natural for the final, silent "e" to be dropped after a while. "Suite" doesn't follow the pattern of a silent "e" after the consonant after a long vowel, e.g., "bate", "date". Signature************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * >>>>> I can't recall seeing or hearing "chaise lounge" in BrE, nor "suit" >>>>> for furniture. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > after a while. "Suite" doesn't follow the pattern of a silent "e" > after the consonant after a long vowel, e.g., "bate", "date". All the same, the e is the only clue that one is pronounced "sue+t" and the other "sweet". SignatureRob Bannister >> [...] >>> A chaise lounge is an item that may be included in a suit of furniture. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >I did, however, find something that I hadn't known: "suit" is derived >ultimately from Latin "sequitur", which means much the same as "suite". From www.dictionary.com for "suit": 8. suite (defs. 13, 5). From ditto for "suite: 1. a number of things forming a series or set. 3. a set of furniture, esp. a set comprising the basic furniture necessary for one room: a bedroom suite. Signature************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * >>I've just checked OneLook, which seems to have a bias towards US >>dictionaries, and I couldn't find any definition of "suit" that could [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > 3. a set of furniture, esp. a set comprising the basic > furniture necessary for one room: a bedroom suite. I'm familiar with the following terms (for bedroom or living room furniture): set, suit (think "suit of clothes"), and suite (pronounced "sweet"). In our own household, we might use "set" when it's a matching (or possibly just compatible) group of furniture. Generally, though, it's just "furniture," as in "we bought some new living room furniture." That includes the tables as well as the couch and chair{s}. The usage of "suite" sounds rather dated to me, though. 1950s maybe. SignatureMaria Conlon >> [...] >>> A chaise lounge is an item that may be included in a suit of furniture. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > I did, however, find something that I hadn't known: "suit" is derived > ultimately from Latin "sequitur", which means much the same as "suite". You should have realised that from your knowledge of French. SignatureRob Bannister >> [...] >>> A chaise lounge is an item that may be included in a suit of furniture. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >> I can't recall seeing or hearing "chaise lounge" in BrE, nor "suit" for >> furniture. > I've just checked OneLook, which seems to have a bias towards US > dictionaries, and I couldn't find any definition of "suit" that could > be applied to furniture. Hampered by having the dead-tree MWCD11th at hand, I find one of the definitions of suit is a complete set of something. But, yes, suite has the definition "a set of matching furniture." > I did, however, find something that I hadn't known: "suit" is derived > ultimately from Latin "sequitur", which means much the same as "suite". And so did suit when it became English, more than two centuries before suite. In AmE, when suite means furnishings for one room, it is pronounced suit. The other pronunciation would imply to some furnishings for a suite of rooms. SignatureLars Eighner <http://larseighner.com/> September 5845, 1993 223 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. Lars Eighner wrote, in <slrnh9pb7r.2mhl.usenet@debranded.larseighner.com> on Tue, 1 Sep 2009 05:18:32 +0000 (UTC): > > I've just checked OneLook, which seems to have a bias towards US > > dictionaries, and I couldn't find any definition of "suit" that could [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > definitions of suit is a complete set of something. But, yes, suite has the > definition "a set of matching furniture." Does it give an example of suit as a set of anything except playing cards? SignatureNick Spalding BrE/IrE >Lars Eighner wrote, in ><slrnh9pb7r.2mhl.usenet@debranded.larseighner.com> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >Does it give an example of suit as a set of anything except playing >cards? Let's guess. It might give the example of a set of clothing (2 or 3 pieces). SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) >>Lars Eighner wrote, in >><slrnh9pb7r.2mhl.usenet@debranded.larseighner.com> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >>Does it give an example of suit as a set of anything except playing >>cards? > Let's guess. It might give the example of a set of clothing (2 or 3 > pieces). 4. a group of things forming a unit: SUITE --- used chiefly of armor, sails, and counters in a games 5. a set of garments ...etc. That SUITE is small caps, MW's way of saying synonym. MW being organized on history, they seem to be saying clothing came later. "Men's furnishings," of course, is a way of saying men's clothing especially when the upscale variety is implied. So it seems the connection between furniture for yourself and clothing for your digs goes deeper than the doublet of suit and suite. It is generous to call suit and suite a doublet. MW tags suit as 14c --- time immemorial for modern English --- and suite as 1673. Yet it is difficult to prove these are not the same word, even in English, albeit with differing spellings and pronunciations. I gather retinue is no longer a common sense of either word in either dialect, but it once was a sense of both words. A petition in law or love seems to be only a suit. Otherwise, a complete set of something seems to underlie the remaining senses of the nouns. Sails? If English were the language of a maritime nation, surely someone would have thought of that immediately. SignatureLars Eighner <http://larseighner.com/> September 5845, 1993 223 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. > 4. a group of things forming a unit: SUITE --- used chiefly of armor, sails, > and counters in a games 5. a set of garments ...etc. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > It is generous to call suit and suite a doublet. I'd like to work "singleton [set]" into this somehow. SignatureClassical Greek lent itself to the promulgation of a rich culture, indeed, to Western civilization. Computer languages bring us doorbells that chime with thirty-two tunes, alt.sex.bestiality, and Tetris clones. (Stoll 1995) >Lars Eighner wrote, in ><slrnh9pb7r.2mhl.usenet@debranded.larseighner.com> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >Does it give an example of suit as a set of anything except playing >cards? The item of men's clothing called a suit is obviusly a set of two or three matching items of apparel. Signature************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * >>Lars Eighner wrote, in >><slrnh9pb7r.2mhl.usenet@debranded.larseighner.com> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >The item of men's clothing called a suit is obviusly a set of two >or three matching items of apparel. Since many men buy at least one matching tie when buying a new suit, it could be considered number three or four. Then there's the new shoes and... SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs, who speaks AmE, lives near Dublin, Ireland and usually spells in BrE >>>Lars Eighner wrote, in >>><slrnh9pb7r.2mhl.usenet@debranded.larseighner.com> [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >it could be considered number three or four. Then there's the new >shoes and... I don't know what it is like at the top end of the market, but lower down a second pair of matching trousers will sometimes be offered with a suit. The idea is that trousers tend to wear out faster than jackets. SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) >>>>Lars Eighner wrote, in >>>><slrnh9pb7r.2mhl.usenet@debranded.larseighner.com> [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] >down a second pair of matching trousers will sometimes be offered with a >suit. The idea is that trousers tend to wear out faster than jackets. Between wearing them out, outgrowing them in the waist and not remembering which pair goes with which jacket, I'd like to have at *least* two pairs of trousers for each jacket. SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs, who speaks AmE, lives near Dublin, Ireland and usually spells in BrE Chuck wrote on Fri, 04 Sep 2009 14:16:34 +0100: >>>>> Lars Eighner wrote, in >>>>> <slrnh9pb7r.2mhl.usenet@debranded.larseighner.com> [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] >> sometimes be offered with a suit. The idea is that trousers >> tend to wear out faster than jackets. > Between wearing them out, outgrowing them in the waist and not > remembering which pair goes with which jacket, I'd like to > have at *least* two pairs of trousers for each jacket. While I might like to have two different sizes of trousers to allow for waist fluctuations, to me a suit is *very* formal and I seldom wear one. A blue blazer and wash-and-wear chinos is my usual limit for formality and the pants get used in my normal sequence of wear. SignatureJames Silverton Potomac, Maryland Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not > Chuck wrote on Fri, 04 Sep 2009 14:16:34 +0100: > [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] >A blue blazer and wash-and-wear chinos is my usual limit for formality >and the pants get used in my normal sequence of wear. What you do call the combination of a suit jacket and a pair of pants you bought separately? Unacceptable or not, I find myself in such combinations frequently. SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs, who speaks AmE, lives near Dublin, Ireland and usually spells in BrE Chuck wrote on Sat, 05 Sep 2009 14:21:27 +0100: >> Chuck wrote on Fri, 04 Sep 2009 14:16:34 +0100: >> [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] >> is my usual limit for formality and the pants get used in my >> normal sequence of wear. > What you do call the combination of a suit jacket and a pair > of pants you bought separately? Unacceptable or not, I find > myself in such combinations frequently. I don't know but it seems rather senior-citizenish (if I may coin a word) to wear a jacket and pants from unrelated suits. SignatureJames Silverton Potomac, Maryland Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not >> Chuck wrote on Fri, 04 Sep 2009 14:16:34 +0100: >> [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] >you bought separately? Unacceptable or not, I find myself in such >combinations frequently. Some of the better men's clothing shops used to sell separate, matching, trousers to suits when all suits were wool. It wasn't that different waist sizes were needed, but that trousers didn't keep their crease. Businessmen, when traveling, would pack the extra trousers so they could have a sharply creased pair when the other pair became baggy. Brooks Brothers suits, for example, could be purchased with a second pair of trousers. I had a few suits like this. The need for this went away when suits started to be made of blends that included "permanent-press" attributes. Now, a second pair of trousers is available with very cheap, low-quality, suits. They are sold off-the-rack with jackets and trousers sold separately. SignatureTony Cooper - Orlando, Florida >>> Chuck wrote on Fri, 04 Sep 2009 14:16:34 +0100: >>> [quoted text clipped - 62 lines] > low-quality, suits. They are sold off-the-rack with jackets and > trousers sold separately. Surely the sheen on the seat of a pair of blue gabardine suit trousers is a feature of literature? My first suit was just such a blue gabardine, wore like iron, and came with an optional pair of dark gray wool trousers. Quite smart in the day, especially when combined with the very light pink button-down shirt and a gray/pink tie of current fashion. SignatureFrank ess [...] > Surely the sheen on the seat of a pair of blue gabardine suit trousers > is a feature of literature? "Your eyes, your eyes, they shine like the pants of a blue serge suit. That's not a reflection on you—it's on the pants." --Grouch Marx ("The Cocoanuts") SignatureCordially, Eric Walker, Owlcroft House http://owlcroft.com/english/ Chuck Riggs wrote... > Unacceptable or not, I find myself in such combinations > frequently. I try to avoid being seen when wearing combinations, unless they're concealed. SignatureNoel >Chuck Riggs wrote... >> Unacceptable or not, I find myself in such combinations >> frequently. > >I try to avoid being seen when wearing combinations, unless they're >concealed. Except for the trousers I buy with suit jackets, all of my clothes are combinations. Nerds and women tend to select specific ties, socks, shoes and hats to go with a suit or jacket they are buying, not that most men don't do it occasionally and that I haven't done so myself in a thoughtless moment. SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs, who speaks AmE, lives near Dublin, Ireland and usually spells in BrE Chuck wrote on Sun, 06 Sep 2009 14:19:18 +0100: >> Chuck Riggs wrote... >>> Unacceptable or not, I find myself in such combinations >>> frequently. >> >> I try to avoid being seen when wearing combinations, unless >> they're concealed. > Except for the trousers I buy with suit jackets, all of my > clothes are combinations. Nerds and women tend to select > specific ties, socks, shoes and hats to go with a suit or > jacket they are buying, not that most men don't do it > occasionally and that I haven't done so myself in a > thoughtless moment. -- On the very rare occasions that I pay a lot of money for a new suit, I do tend to also treat myself to new a tie. However, I am trying to remember when I last wore a suit or even a tie. SignatureJames Silverton Potomac, Maryland Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not > Chuck wrote on Sun, 06 Sep 2009 14:19:18 +0100: > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >do tend to also treat myself to new a tie. However, I am trying to >remember when I last wore a suit or even a tie. I thoroughly dislike them, especially in warm weather. When office protocol called for us to wear a tie, I'd wear mine at half mast. I'd tighten it for meetings, only. SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs, who speaks AmE, lives near Dublin, Ireland and usually spells in BrE >> Chuck wrote on Sun, 06 Sep 2009 14:19:18 +0100: >> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > protocol called for us to wear a tie, I'd wear mine at half mast. I'd > tighten it for meetings, only. I don't just dislike ties, I dislike wearing jackets. In fact, if the weather allowed, I would wear short sleeves the year round - I just hate the feeling of cloth round my arms; it feels hampering. SignatureRob Bannister > I don't just dislike ties, I dislike wearing jackets. In fact, if the > weather allowed, I would wear short sleeves the year round - I just > hate the feeling of cloth round my arms; it feels hampering. I wear short-sleeved shirts year-round. Now, I do have to wear jackets in the colder months, but I take them off inside. Brian SignatureDay 217 of the "no grouchy usenet posts" project In alt.usage.english, Default User wrote: >> I don't just dislike ties, I dislike wearing jackets. In fact, if the >> weather allowed, I would wear short sleeves the year round - I just >> hate the feeling of cloth round my arms; it feels hampering. > >I wear short-sleeved shirts year-round. Now, I do have to wear jackets >in the colder months, but I take them off inside. Ditto. And ties? Weddings and funerals only. I have two ties, one for each. SignatureMike Barnes Cheshire, England Mike wrote on Tue, 8 Sep 2009 10:47:27 +0100: > In alt.usage.english, Default User wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >> wear jackets in the colder months, but I take them off >> inside. > Ditto. > And ties? Weddings and funerals only. I have two ties, one for > each. Pretty much my experience, tho' there are a few other professional formal events where I wear a suit. My normal indoor wear is a short-sleeved knit cotton shirt (a so-called golf shirt) with a pocket, jeans or chinos and a sweater if the temperature is low. I may also wear shorts in the summer. SignatureJames Silverton Potomac, Maryland Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not > In alt.usage.english, Default User wrote: > > I wear short-sleeved shirts year-round. Now, I do have to wear > > jackets in the colder months, but I take them off inside. > > Ditto. > > And ties? Weddings and funerals only. I have two ties, one for each. I was pretty pleased when the cumpnee switched to casual attire. Now I wear polo shirts to work, and of course no tie. Brian SignatureDay 218 of the "no grouchy usenet posts" project >> In alt.usage.english, Default User wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > I was pretty pleased when the cumpnee switched to casual attire. Now I > wear polo shirts to work, and of course no tie. I always wear a tie to work, despite the dress-code allowing anything from rock tee shirts to three piece suits - and both can be seen any day. I like the idea of coming home, taking my work clothes off and being home me rather than corporate me. SignatureOnline waterways route planner: http://canalplan.org.uk development version: http://canalplan.eu >>>> I wear short-sleeved shirts year-round. Now, I do have to wear >>>> jackets in the colder months, but I take them off inside. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > I like the idea of coming home, taking my work clothes off and being > home me rather than corporate me. I like that idea also. When I still worked (in Florida), upon arriving home, I took off my work clothes (T-shirt and jeans) and jumped in the pool for a cool swim. Nice. After that it was shorts time. SignatureSkitt (AmE) >>>>> I wear short-sleeved shirts year-round. Now, I do have to wear >>>>> jackets in the colder months, but I take them off inside. [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > home, I took off my work clothes (T-shirt and jeans) and jumped in the > pool for a cool swim. Nice. After that it was shorts time. For me, it was more a question of replacing the shorts I wore for work with more comfortable ones for lounging around in at home. The biggie was taking my socks off and replacing my shoes for sandals or thongs. SignatureRob Bannister >>>>>> I wear short-sleeved shirts year-round. Now, I do have to wear >>>>>> jackets in the colder months, but I take them off inside. [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > with more comfortable ones for lounging around in at home. The biggie > was taking my socks off and replacing my shoes for sandals or thongs. Oh, bare feet for me. SignatureSkitt (AmE) >>>>>> I wear short-sleeved shirts year-round. Now, I do have to wear >>>>>> jackets in the colder months, but I take them off inside. [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >with more comfortable ones for lounging around in at home. The biggie >was taking my socks off and replacing my shoes for sandals or thongs. My favourite working arrangement, albeit the most stressful at times, was not when I commuted an hour each way to a typical house, wife and yard in the burbs, but when I could see my office window from the living room of my comfortable, high rise apartment, they were so close together. SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs, who speaks AmE, lives near Dublin, Ireland,usually spells in BrE and hasn't corrected his email address yet >>> In alt.usage.english, Default User wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > I like the idea of coming home, taking my work clothes off and being > home me rather than corporate me. One of the few benifits of dress codes at work. For the twenty-or-so years prior to retiring, the code at my place was: must be able to assume Court-appropriate appearance at a few minutes' notice. I had that few minutes come up a dozen or fewer times. It became easy to predict within limits when it might appear, which was seldom, but not quite never. Of course everyone was ready for scheduled appearances. One time it came when I was visiting another office, distant from my stash of jackets and ties, so I borrowed one of each. The jacket was fine, but the yellow-flowered-on-green-field tie didn't go with my red-and-white-checkered red cowboy-style shirt. The judge looked me up and down and said, "I have to guess you aren't Elizabeth Mumble ... " SignatureFrank ess > In alt.usage.english, Default User wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > And ties? Weddings and funerals only. I have two ties, one for each. I put on a jacket and tie for my uncle's funeral, a couple of years ago. I found myself sitting next to my cousin, my uncle's son, who was wearing a fairly informal shirt, no tie and no jacket. I may not bother next time. SignatureDavid In alt.usage.english, the Omrud wrote: >I put on a jacket and tie for my uncle's funeral, a couple of years >ago. I found myself sitting next to my cousin, my uncle's son, who was >wearing a fairly informal shirt, no tie and no jacket. I may not >bother next time. I'm going to a Civil Partnership ceremony this weekend and it's "black tie optional". I'm not sure what to make of that. SignatureMike Barnes Cheshire, England > In alt.usage.english, the Omrud wrote: >> I put on a jacket and tie for my uncle's funeral, a couple of years [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > I'm going to a Civil Partnership ceremony this weekend and it's "black > tie optional". I'm not sure what to make of that. We're going to Durham for a more conventional wedding on Saturday, of Daughter's best friend (we are close friends to her parents). Daughter has strictly instructed me (and Son) to wear a suit. SignatureDavid >> In alt.usage.english, the Omrud wrote: >>> I put on a jacket and tie for my uncle's funeral, a couple of years [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Daughter's best friend (we are close friends to her parents). Daughter > has strictly instructed me (and Son) to wear a suit. But she didn't mention a tie? SignatureRob Bannister >>> In alt.usage.english, the Omrud wrote: >>>> I put on a jacket and tie for my uncle's funeral, a couple of years [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > But she didn't mention a tie? I don't remember the exact words, but she certainly implied it. She complained when she saw Son's graduation photographs - apparently I chose too dark a tie for the light suit and shirt I had picked for a summer's day in Edinburgh. SignatureDavid On 09 Sep 2009, the Omrud wrote >> In alt.usage.english, the Omrud wrote: >>> I put on a jacket and tie for my uncle's funeral, a couple of [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > parents). Daughter has strictly instructed me (and Son) to wear > a suit. I've been following this thread with interest, as most posters seem to agree that suits are horrible, ties are even worse, and that the guy who attended the funeral in an open-neck shirt was to be applauded for his insistence on comfort over convention. I thus hesitate to disagree, but I do -- very, very strongly. If I saw someone at a funeral in an open-neck shirt, I'd think "Geez -- could you possibly get more 'This is really all about me, me, me'? Why not just wear slippers and stay in your pajamas as well -- that'd be comfy. And feel free to use your phone while you're at it -- after all, we wouldn't want you to feel put upon." Weddings and funerals and such-like are about people sharing a rite of passage; the guests' "comfiness factor" doesn't come first, as the events belong to someone else and to the social group in attendance. If it's too much bloody trouble to mark a formal event in such a slightly formal manner as wearing a tie, I don't think people should bother to come along at all. Sorry, but I think the "I'll dress for my comfort and the hell with what the event represents or the conventions" is pretty well the ultimate in self-centredness. SignatureCheers, Harvey CanEng and BrEng, indiscriminately mixed Quoth HVS <usenet@REMOVETHISwhhvs.co.uk>, and I quote: >On 09 Sep 2009, the Omrud wrote > [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] >what the event represents or the conventions" is pretty well the >ultimate in self-centredness. For the last funeral I attended I put on a black suit and tie. As a result I felt over-dressed and out of place at the secular ceremony where the other people (who were more closely related to the deceased than I was) were dressed in light-coloured, more casual clothes. SignatureJames > Quoth HVS <usenet@REMOVETHISwhhvs.co.uk>, and I quote: > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > the deceased than I was) were dressed in light-coloured, more > casual clothes. The convention changes over time, as what is considered "formal" changes, and what is considered appropriate for different occasions. There was a music hall song about a man who was ostracised after going to a funeral in brown boots (it turned out he'd given his black boots to somebody poorer). Surely nobody would nowadays consider that attending a family funeral in brown shoes was disrespectful. It never occurred to me to consider my cousin's choice of clothing in any way wrong. As the oldest child of the deceased, he's more likely to be correct than others, by definition. SignatureDavid In alt.usage.english, HVS wrote: >I've been following this thread with interest, as most posters seem >to agree that suits are horrible, ties are even worse, and that the [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >saw someone at a funeral in an open-neck shirt, I'd think "Geez -- >could you possibly get more 'This is really all about me, me, me'? You clearly go to the kind of funerals where a tie is expected. They're not all like that. Going tieless isn't always the "insistence on comfort over convention" that you imagine: sometimes it's just fitting in, and funereal dress wouldn't be. SignatureMike Barnes Cheshire, England On 10 Sep 2009, Mike Barnes wrote > In alt.usage.english, HVS wrote: >> I've been following this thread with interest, as most posters [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > "insistence on comfort over convention" that you imagine: > sometimes it's just fitting in, and funereal dress wouldn't be. Perhaps it depends on what we're referring to as "the funeral". The ones I've been to around here -- I'm talking strictly about the ceremonial bit at the church or crematorium -- have definitely been suit- or jacket-and-tie affairs. The receptions afterwards -- I'm not sure if people feel comfortable with the term "wake" these days -- has tended to be "jackets off/ties off or loosened". I wouldn't refer to that gathering as "the funeral", though. SignatureCheers, Harvey CanEng and BrEng, indiscriminately mixed >On 10 Sep 2009, Mike Barnes wrote > [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >off or loosened". I wouldn't refer to that gathering as "the >funeral", though. The "wake" traditionally occurs before the funeral. OED: 3. The watching (esp. by night) of relatives and friends beside the body of a dead person from death to burial, or during a part of that time; the drinking, feasting, and other observances incidental to this. Now chiefly Anglo-Irish or with reference to Irish custom. Also applied to similar funeral customs in other times or among non-Christian peoples. The meaning of the word is literal. The participants remain awake during the night hours when they would normally be asleep. SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) On 10 Sep 2009, Peter Duncanson (BrE) wrote >> On 10 Sep 2009, Mike Barnes wrote >> [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > > The "wake" traditionally occurs before the funeral. [snip OED] Hmm... That definition seems slightly wonky to me, as it seems to roll the vigil together with the other bits. Collins's version -- which separates the meanings -- includes the usage I was thinking of: 9. (in Ireland) festivities held after a funeral SignatureCheers, Harvey CanEng and BrEng, indiscriminately mixed HVS wrote, in <Xns9C828AA3763AAwhhvans@news.albasani.net> on Thu, 10 Sep 2009 13:37:43 +0100: > On 10 Sep 2009, Peter Duncanson (BrE) wrote > [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > > 9. (in Ireland) festivities held after a funeral It has acquired that meaning relatively recently since it became uncommon for the dead person to remain at home until the funeral. Nowadays it is almost universal for them to be taken to an undertaker's premises shortly after death and then, for RCs anyway, brought to the church the night before the funeral. SignatureNick Spalding BrE/IrE >HVS wrote, in <Xns9C828AA3763AAwhhvans@news.albasani.net> > on Thu, 10 Sep 2009 13:37:43 +0100: > >> On 10 Sep 2009, Peter Duncanson (BrE) wrote <snip> >> > The "wake" traditionally occurs before the funeral. >> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >premises shortly after death and then, for RCs anyway, brought to the >church the night before the funeral. The bringing of the dead person to the church is sometimes known as the "removal (of the remains)". I have only met this in funeral announcements and reports in Ireland, and probably only in the Republic. OED: Anglo-Irish. In full, _removal of remains_. The formal taking of a body to the church for the funeral service. Cf. LIFT n.2 1 c. 1890 Pall Mall Gaz. 24 Nov. 4/2 (heading) The late Lady Rosebery. Removal of the remains to-day. 1939 JOYCE Finnegans Wake 544 Private chapel occupies return landing, removal every other quarter day. 1949 Irish Times 15 Oct. 12/1 The family..wish to return their sincere thanks to..all who attended removal of remains, Mass and funeral. .... My observation in Northern Ireland is that when a body has been kept at the deceased's home the funeral announcement may be along the lines of "The funeral will be at 9.30 from the home to XYZ Church (Chapel or Crematorium) at 10.45 and afterwards at ABC Cemetery". This is an invitation for those who wish, to line the road outside the house to be present for the transfer of the coffin into the hearse and then to follow the hearse to the church (or wherever), to attend the service, and then to attend the burial. Not every funeral has all these phases. Not all phases are necessarily public. The local custom is that unless otherwise stated in a funeral announcement anyone may attend. (My local crematorium chapel seats about 100. It is increasingly crowded. The authorities are considering building a larger one.) SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) > On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 12:56:10 +0100, HVS <usenet@REMOVETHISwhhvs.co.uk> >> Perhaps it depends on what we're referring to as "the funeral". >> [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > The meaning of the word is literal. The participants remain awake during > the night hours when they would normally be asleep. We tend to use 'wake' for the periods a few days before the funeral when people pay their respects to the family at the funeral home. I think modern terms like 'visitation' are becoming more popular. These are not all-night affairs - the family might arrange one afternoon 2-4 and one or two evenings 7-9, and there might be a period for the immediate family just before the funeral or memorial service. There may be an open or closed coffin, or the urn and remains. Really traditional people, of course, have the coffin open, and it's practically required that you go up to it as well as speak with all the family. These are generally very sedate affairs, not at all like the one in 'Paddy Murphy's Wake', although the funeral director who buried my grandmother claimed that he stayed around all the time because some people tried 'drinking and carrying on and everything'. People don't dress especially for them, except perhaps for an evening session - if a colleague at work has died, you just go in your work clothes. Receptions afterwards do happen, but they don't seem to be automatic or routine. I'd expect them to be more informal than the funeral itself, but dress at funerals isn't all that formal any more. SignatureCheryl >> On 10 Sep 2009, Mike Barnes wrote >>> In alt.usage.english, HVS wrote: [black for weddings and funerals] >> The receptions afterwards -- I'm not sure if people feel >> comfortable with the term "wake" these days -- has tended to be >> "jackets off/ties off or loosened". I wouldn't refer to that >> gathering as "the funeral", though. > > The "wake" traditionally occurs before the funeral. You could think of the other kind as the wake of your friend's passage. > OED: > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > The meaning of the word is literal. The participants remain awake > during the night hours when they would normally be asleep. HVS wrote on Thu, 10 Sep 2009 12:56:10 +0100: > The receptions afterwards -- I'm not sure if people feel > comfortable with the term "wake" these days -- has tended to > be "jackets off/ties off or loosened". I wouldn't refer to > that gathering as "the funeral", though. I'm going OT I think but is a funeral reception a "wake"? I've never been to one but I thought they were held *before* the funeral. SignatureJames Silverton Potomac, Maryland Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not On 10 Sep 2009, James Silverton wrote > HVS wrote on Thu, 10 Sep 2009 12:56:10 +0100: > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > never been to one but I thought they were held *before* the > funeral. I must hang around with too many Irish people; as I've just posted, there's a usage listed in Collins which is the one I'm familiar with: 9. (in Ireland) festivities held after a funeral. SignatureCheers, Harvey CanEng and BrEng, indiscriminately mixed >On 10 Sep 2009, James Silverton wrote > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > >9. (in Ireland) festivities held after a funeral. It seems that the meaning has been extended to include the above: http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/wake_1?view=uk noun 1 a watch or vigil held beside the body of someone who has died. 2 (especially in Ireland) a party held after a funeral. 3 (wakes) treated as sing. an annual festival and holiday in some parts of northern England. - ORIGIN Old English, related to WATCH; sense 3 of the noun is probably from Old Norse. And: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wake_%28ceremony%29 A wake is a ceremony associated with death. Traditionally, a wake takes place in the house of the deceased, with the body present; however, modern wakes are often performed at a funeral home or a relative's home after the ceremony. SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) >> Mike Barnes wrote: >>>> I put on a jacket and tie for my uncle's funeral, a couple of >>>> years ago. I found myself sitting next to my cousin, my [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > what the event represents or the conventions" is pretty well the > ultimate in self-centredness. It all depends on the circumstances. One of the funerals I attended was for a co-worker in Florida. The service was in mid-day, during working hours. All attendees were in their normal work attire, ranging from T-shirts and jeans to white shirt and slacks. As far as I could tell, no one felt that anyone was improperly dressed. (The fairly young deceased had committed suicide. I never found out why.) SignatureSkitt (AmE) [...] > It all depends on the circumstances. One of the funerals I attended was > for [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > anyone was improperly dressed. (The fairly young deceased had committed > suicide. I never found out why.) Couldn't cope with the corporate dress code. SignatureLes (BrE) > [...] > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Couldn't cope with the corporate dress code. Strangely enough, at times he used to come to work in full cowboy regalia. Minus the six-shooter, though. SignatureSkitt (AmE) > It all depends on the circumstances. One of the funerals I attended was > for a co-worker in Florida. The service was in mid-day, during working > hours. All attendees were in their normal work attire, ranging from > T-shirts and jeans to white shirt and slacks. As far as I could tell, > no one felt that anyone was improperly dressed. That's exactly how it was at the last funeral I attended some years ago. It was an 11-year old girl whom I had been teaching and whose mother I knew, but it was a stinking hot day during working hours. I only had time to attend the actual burial, and only the mother was dressed in anything other than normal working clothes, so my shorts and shirt were not out of place. SignatureRob Bannister > On 09 Sep 2009, the Omrud wrote > [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > in such a slightly formal manner as wearing a tie, I don't think > people should bother to come along at all. I totally agree with your thoughts about respecting the formality of an occasion - I have the feeling that young Australians have no sense of "occasion" at all - but to my mind, the actual form of dress is less important. One's behaviour surely counts for more than clothing, ie no phones, chatting, etc. After all, most of these unofficial dress codes don't seem to apply to women - yes, there are suits for women, but a dress or skirt and top can be equally, if not more formal, so why should it be different for men? To my mind, if you are wearing clean, not obviously-informal clothing, then that's good enough - ie you don't wear a Hawaiian shirt or an old T-shirt, but a shirt with a collar and smart shorts could well fit the bill, depending on weather and time of day. SignatureRob Bannister On 11 Sep 2009, Robert Bannister wrote >> On 09 Sep 2009, the Omrud wrote >> [quoted text clipped - 47 lines] > shorts could well fit the bill, depending on weather and time of > day. And as you mentioned in another post, it's possible to over-dress; no disagreement there. As I've said elsethread, I think the "suitable dress boundaries" for funerals are pretty wide, and they undoubtedly vary from culture to culture; Australia may well be different. In England, though, I don't think the boundaries extend to open-necked shirts, non-sombre colours, shorts, or other casual wear unless one has a damned good reason for that. Within the boundaries (unless otherwise clearly specified): a suit, or jacket-and-tie. Not "characterful" -- no tie with the dancing teddies, or the Warhol "Marilyn" one -- and nothing bright enough to be making a "statement" (the plaid trousers, yellow jacket, or red socks should be left at home). Damned good reasons for dressing outside that box? A specific request by the bereaved family to do so, a physical condition that prevents it, or poverty. Not damned good enough reasons? "I find ties too uncomfortable", or "I disagree with the conventions and wish to make that point". Those are "This is first and foremost about me" reasons, regardless of what the demeanour of the person may be. SignatureCheers, Harvey CanEng and BrEng, indiscriminately mixed In alt.usage.english, HVS wrote: >As I've said elsethread, I think the "suitable dress boundaries" >for funerals are pretty wide, and they undoubtedly vary from [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >Those are "This is first and foremost about me" reasons, regardless >of what the demeanour of the person may be. Fair enough, except that I wouldn't need a specific *request* from the family. Just an indication of what people will be wearing would be enough. I don't have a suit but I do have an outfit for funerals (and, with a different tie, weddings). White business shirt, dark tie with discreet pattern, grey silk/wool jacket, grey wool trousers, black lace-up shoes. If informal dress was indicated I'd probably keep the tie in my pocket. All my other clothes are unsuitable for any funeral I'm likely to attend. Is it fair to conclude that you've been to one or more funerals where you feel that some people have dressed too casually? SignatureMike Barnes Cheshire, England On 11 Sep 2009, Mike Barnes wrote > In alt.usage.english, HVS wrote: >> As I've said elsethread, I think the "suitable dress [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > Is it fair to conclude that you've been to one or more funerals > where you feel that some people have dressed too casually? Yes, a couple, but what set me off on this occasion was what seemed to be the general tone of the thread -- "suits bad, ties worse, casual good, formal stuffy" -- and David's positive reaction to the guy who showed up to a funderal in an open-neck shirt. I might tolerate casual dress at a funeral -- and I certainly wouldn't make a fuss, as I don't "do" fuss -- but I really don't accept that it's a jolly admirable thing to do. SignatureCheers, Harvey CanEng and BrEng, indiscriminately mixed > On 11 Sep 2009, Mike Barnes wrote > [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > worse, casual good, formal stuffy" -- and David's positive reaction > to the guy who showed up to a funderal in an open-neck shirt. Can I remind readers that it wasn't just "a funeral" but his own dad's funeral. And that both the last two funeral's I've attended have been full of male relatives of the deceased who wore no ties. I have no idea what I will wear at my parents' funerals, but I won't expect anybody to have any views on my choice, other than my sister and the remaining parent. SignatureDavid On 11 Sep 2009, the Omrud wrote >> On 11 Sep 2009, Mike Barnes wrote >> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > won't expect anybody to have any views on my choice, other than > my sister and the remaining parent. I certainly wouldn't let my views be known to the bereaved -- it's safe to let me out in public, guv, as I'd rather die than create a fuss in public -- but I do suspect I'd silently think it was not entirely appropriate. SignatureCheers, Harvey CanEng and BrEng, indiscriminately mixed > On 11 Sep 2009, the Omrud wrote > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > fuss in public -- but I do suspect I'd silently think it was not > entirely appropriate. Very English; I approve. You've been naturalised. SignatureDavid On 11 Sep 2009, the Omrud wrote >> On 11 Sep 2009, the Omrud wrote >> [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > Very English; I approve. You've been naturalised. [grin] SignatureCheers, Harvey CanEng and BrEng, indiscriminately mixed >> In alt.usage.english, Default User wrote: >>> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >wearing a fairly informal shirt, no tie and no jacket. I may not bother >next time. I've pretty much given up on neckties, except when one is required for an onstage costume. I now wear a black turtleneck and dark grey sport coat to funerals and the like. And to practically anything else calling for a little formality. Signature************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * >> In alt.usage.english, Default User wrote: >>> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >wearing a fairly informal shirt, no tie and no jacket. I may not bother >next time. Is that uncle going to die again? SignatureRobin (BrE) Herts, England >>> In alt.usage.english, Default User wrote: >>>> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Is that uncle going to die again? I forgot to ask him, but it's as well to be prepared. SignatureDavid the Omrud filted: >>>> And ties? Weddings and funerals only. I have two ties, one for each. >>> I put on a jacket and tie for my uncle's funeral, a couple of years ago. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >I forgot to ask him, but it's as well to be prepared. One is reminded of the old story of the man who asks for leave from his job because his wife is having an appendectomy...the boss refuses the request, and the man asks why...boss says "you took time off two years ago for your wife's appendectomy; I never heard of anyone with a second appendix"...the man responds "did you ever hear of someone with a second wife?"... (ObReturnToTopic: I like ties, and I have some nice ones, but life these days doesn't present me with many appropriate occasions to wear them)....r SignatureA pessimist sees the glass as half empty. An optometrist asks whether you see the glass more full like this?...or like this? >> In alt.usage.english, Default User wrote: >>> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > wearing a fairly informal shirt, no tie and no jacket. I may not bother > next time. I don't seem to have proper funeral attire if I am expected to be outdoors for part of the procedings. Last time, it was a toss-up between the tatty jean jacket and the rather too cheerful bright red one. I ended up with the red. Indoors, isn't too difficult to dress for, at least for women. I remember the comments directed at one funeral attendee who was swathed in far more black than the next-of-kin was as I pick out a dark plain pair of slacks or skirt and top. It's better to be considered too informal than as trying to upstage the next-of-kin. I've always thought mens' ties were extremely silly and unnecessary garments. For sheer discomfort and impracticality, they can't compare with women's pantyhose or high-heeled shoes, but they are still an odd garment. SignatureCheryl [...] > I've always thought mens' ties were extremely silly and unnecessary > garments. For sheer discomfort and impracticality, they can't compare > with women's pantyhose or high-heeled shoes, but they are still an odd > garment. They're very useful for polishing one's glasses after eating a bowl of steaming mulligatawny. SignatureLes (BrE) >[...] > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >They're very useful for polishing one's glasses after eating a bowl of >steaming mulligatawny. And to choke oneself, if no rope is available. SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs, who speaks AmE, lives near Dublin, Ireland and usually spells in BrE >> [...] >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > And to choke oneself, if no rope is available. Which? The pantyhose or the steaming mulligatawny? SignatureRob Bannister >>> [...] >>> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Which? The pantyhose or the steaming mulligatawny? Perhaps you don't know of the tradition. You're supposed to choke yourself with your belt while wearing the pantyhose over your head. Optionally, you can first drink the mulligatawny from the shoes. I have a vague memory that this is done only by British politicians, but I don't know whether there's a rule about that. SignaturePeter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org For an e-mail address, see my web page. >>>> [...] >>>> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >I have a vague memory that this is done only by British politicians, >but I don't know whether there's a rule about that. My first experience with drinking out of a shoe was at the University of Virginia, where there was a tradition when I was there of drinking champagne from a girlfriend's high heel shoe during one of many rip-roaring parties, most likely held during Easters Weekend. SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs, who speaks AmE, lives near Dublin, Ireland,usually spells in BrE and hasn't corrected his email address yet > My first experience with drinking out of a shoe was at the University > of Virginia, where there was a tradition when I was there of drinking > champagne from a girlfriend's high heel shoe during one of many > rip-roaring parties, most likely held during Easters Weekend. Oh, I drank some champagne from your shoe, la-la-la. I was drunk by the time I got through, la-la-la. For I didn't know as I raised that cup, It had taken two bottles to fill the thing up. Tom Lehrer, "The Wiener Schnitzel Waltz" SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |It is one thing to be mistaken; it is 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |quite another to be willfully Palo Alto, CA 94304 |ignorant | Cecil Adams kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com (650)857-7572 http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ > >>> [...] > >>> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > I have a vague memory that this is done only by British politicians, > but I don't know whether there's a rule about that. I understand that for the politicians, oranges are also involved. SignatureLinz Wet Yorks via Cambridge, York, London and Watford My accent may vary > I've always thought mens' ties were extremely silly and unnecessary > garments. For sheer discomfort and impracticality, they can't compare > with women's pantyhose or high-heeled shoes, but they are still an odd > garment. I didn't realise that pantyhose was actually uncomfortable. I thought the problem was that they are difficult to put on and very easy to put a toe or finger nail through. SignatureRob Bannister (Who now has to do this task for his aged mother) >> I've always thought mens' ties were extremely silly and unnecessary >> garments. For sheer discomfort and impracticality, they can't compare [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > the problem was that they are difficult to put on and very easy to put a > toe or finger nail through. Maybe if they fit properly and don't bind at the waist and droop in other places, they're comfortable, especially if they're not the allegedly 'one size fits all' AND the little size chart on the back has some connection to the pantyhose inside the package. But they are extremely uncomfortable to wear outside during a Canadian winter, even if they fit perfectly. Of course, that probably isn't the fault of the pantyhose. Paying good money for something you put a finger through the first time you wear them isn't something I much like either. SignatureCheryl >>> I've always thought mens' ties were extremely silly and unnecessary >>> garments. For sheer discomfort and impracticality, they can't compare [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > Paying good money for something you put a finger through the first time > you wear them isn't something I much like either. At one time, all school desks had hidden, little sharp bits so that every female teacher had laddered hose. I imagine that few offices were much better. SignatureRob Bannister Cheryl wrote, in part: > I've always thought mens' ties were extremely silly and unnecessary > garments. Are they considered "garments"? I suppose they must be, though I'd call them "accessories." Okay, the English-usage issue having been dealt with, I will now give my opinion about men wearing ties. I think ties can be very sexy. Just the fact that a man cares enough to "dress up" is sexy. Tuxedos are all that times a hundred. (We went to a formal shindig last night, and the sight of so many tuxedoed men was great. Yes, hubby wore one. And I was dressed formally, too, of course.) > ....For sheer discomfort and impracticality, they can't compare with > women's pantyhose or high-heeled shoes [...] Stockings with garters or garter belts were not necessarily better, though. By the way, I don't miss the daily wearing of pantyhose; retirement has put all that in the past -- except for certain occasions (like last night). I also don't like wearing knee-highs. High heels never bothered me unless they were too tight-fitting. But then, I never bought ones that were uncomfortable, were too high, or had extra-skinny heels. I'm too practical: I know I'd fall over and be embarrassed. (Even at my wedding I wore mid-level heels, even though my groom was/is about a foot taller than I.) But back to men: Even without ties, they can be oh-so-handsome in certain casual clothes -- including jeans and Tees. SignatureMaria Conlon >> ....For sheer discomfort and impracticality, they can't compare with >> women's pantyhose or high-heeled shoes [...] > > Stockings with garters or garter belts were not necessarily better, though. No. I can remember them. I like slacks - no pantyhose needed. Or bare legs in the summer and dresses and skirts are more comfortable than slacks. > By the way, I don't miss the daily wearing of pantyhose; retirement has > put all that in the past -- except for certain occasions (like last [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > embarrassed. (Even at my wedding I wore mid-level heels, even though my > groom was/is about a foot taller than I.) Although I tried hard in my teens, I could never find a pair of high heels that I didn't remove (or desperately want to remove) > But back to men: Even without ties, they can be oh-so-handsome in > certain casual clothes -- including jeans and Tees. Yes. SignatureCheryl >>> ....For sheer discomfort and impracticality, they can't compare with >>> women's pantyhose or high-heeled shoes [...] [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >Although I tried hard in my teens, I could never find a pair of high >heels that I didn't remove (or desperately want to remove) Same here. SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs, who speaks AmE, lives near Dublin, Ireland,usually spells in BrE and hasn't corrected his email address yet > But back to men: Even without ties, they can be oh-so-handsome in > certain casual clothes -- including jeans and Tees. And of course women can be stunning even with nothing on at all. SignatureRob Bannister Robert Bannister wrote: >> But back to men: Even without ties, they can be oh-so-handsome in >> certain casual clothes -- including jeans and Tees. > > And of course women can be stunning even with nothing on at all. I suppose, but I make no claims. Darkness helps. SignatureMaria Conlon >> But back to men: Even without ties, they can be oh-so-handsome in >> certain casual clothes -- including jeans and Tees. > >And of course women can be stunning even with nothing on at all. Men, too, if it comes to that. -GAWollman SignatureGarrett A. Wollman | What intellectual phenomenon can be older, or more oft wollman@bimajority.org| repeated, than the story of a large research program Opinions not shared by| that impaled itself upon a false central assumption my employers. | accepted by all practitioners? - S.J. Gould, 1993 > But back to men: Even without ties, they can be oh-so-handsome in > certain casual clothes -- including jeans and Tees. I recently watched one of the Sharpe DVDs with Sean Bean. The TV version of those old military uniforms is extremely flattering to the man wearing it, even if it is splattered with mud. Especially if the man is Sean Bean. SignatureCheryl >I've always thought mens' ties were extremely silly and unnecessary >garments. For sheer discomfort and impracticality, they can't compare >with women's pantyhose or high-heeled shoes, but they are still an odd >garment. I liked to wear neckties. I wore a suit and tie every business day until I sold the business and retired. With a few exceptions, almost every suit I purchased over the years was almost indistinguishable from something I already had in my closet. For most of the years, I wore either a solid white, blue, cream, or yellow shirt. In the later years, some striped shirts made their way into my closet, though. The only thing about me that was different day-to-day was my necktie. I bought neckties like some women buy shoes. SignatureTony Cooper - Orlando, Florida >I bought neckties like some women buy shoes. I bet they were less expensive, though. SignatureKaty Jennison spamtrap: remove the first two letters after the @ >>> Chuck wrote on Sun, 06 Sep 2009 14:19:18 +0100: >>> [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >weather allowed, I would wear short sleeves the year round - I just hate >the feeling of cloth round my arms; it feels hampering. Here in the increasingly tropical British Isles, short sleeves generally work. At least that is the style of shirt I prefer. In Maine, where there are four distinct seasons, residents generally prefer light trousers and jackets in the spring, shorts and short-sleeved shirts in the summer, wool in the autumn and gloves, high boots, long johns, wool trousers, flannel shirts and fur hats in the winter. SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs, who speaks AmE, lives near Dublin, Ireland and usually spells in BrE On 08 Sep 2009, Chuck Riggs wrote >>>> Chuck wrote on Sun, 06 Sep 2009 14:19:18 +0100: >>>> [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > autumn and gloves, high boots, long johns, wool trousers, > flannel shirts and fur hats in the winter. Horses and all that. I can't abide short sleeves, and don't own any short-sleeved shirts other than a couple of T-shirts (which I wear only if there's particularly hot garden work to do, after which I switch back into a long-sleeved shirt). My sole concession to very hot weather is to roll my sleeves up half-way to the elbow; no further, though. (No, I don't own a pair of shorts, either; equally disliked.) SignatureCheers, Harvey CanEng and BrEng, indiscriminately mixed >On 08 Sep 2009, Chuck Riggs wrote > [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] >wear only if there's particularly hot garden work to do, after >which I switch back into a long-sleeved shirt). Interesting. I took to short-sleeved shirts with a breast pocket (some with button-down collars) after a three-month trip to America in 1973. Back in those days such shirts were considered very American, but I liked them. In fact <vanity warning> the only time I wore long-sleeved shirts was during visits to IBM development locations, so that I could show off my IBM Special Innovation Award cufflinks and tiepin, something quite unusual for someone in marketing to get. Alas, I don't think anybody realised what they were. >My sole concession to very hot weather is to roll my sleeves up >half-way to the elbow; no further, though. (No, I don't own a >pair of shorts, either; equally disliked.) SignatureRobin (BrE) Herts, England >On 08 Sep 2009, Chuck Riggs wrote > [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] >My sole concession to very hot weather is to roll my sleeves up >half-way to the elbow; no further, though. Unless I'm wearing a short sleeve shirt, mine generally are rolled up halfway, if by "rolled up" you mean folded over three times from the end of the cuff. I have found that it takes a minimum of three folds to keep them in place, but that four is uncomfortable. So, three it is. SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs, who speaks AmE, lives near Dublin, Ireland and usually spells in BrE >Except for the trousers I buy with suit jackets, all of my clothes are >combinations. That provokes an interesting mental image. combination, n 9. = combination-garment. combination garment, a close-fitting under-garment worn mostly by women and children, consisting of combined chemise or undershirt and drawers; This word is, in my experience, dated. However I seem to recall it as "combinations" for a single garment (along the lines of pants and trousers). SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) >>Except for the trousers I buy with suit jackets, all of my clothes are >>combinations. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > "combinations" for a single garment (along the lines of pants and > trousers). AOL. I thought these were called "long johns", but according to Wikipedia these are a two-piece garment: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_underwear> OTOH, the red flannel version advertised here seems to be one-piece: <http://www.redflannels.com/long_johns_adult.html> According to Wikipedia combined top and trousers are called a "union suit", which is a term I've never come across before: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_suit> SignatureLes (BrE) >>>Except for the trousers I buy with suit jackets, all of my clothes are >>>combinations. [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > ><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_suit> Ah, yes. I have met that name but it is not as familiar as combinations. SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) >> Except for the trousers I buy with suit jackets, all of my clothes are >> combinations. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > "combinations" for a single garment (along the lines of pants and > trousers). And weren't children sewn into them at the beginning of winter and not let out until spring? Or is that a myth? SignatureRob Bannister >>> Except for the trousers I buy with suit jackets, all of my clothes are >>> combinations. [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > And weren't children sewn into them at the beginning of winter and not > let out until spring? Or is that a myth? I read in a book that seemed to be serious and reputable that the early explorers and fur traders with the Hudson Bay Company and rivals wore not merely their underwear but all their clothing from fall to spring. There was no mention of them being sewn in the clothing; I think wearing all of it all the time was voluntary, in the sense of you voluntarily dress that way, or you freeze, campfires not being the most efficient of heating systems. Really, you know, a lot of these little details get left out of the Adventure Tales in children's books. SignatureCheryl >>>> Except for the trousers I buy with suit jackets, all of my clothes are >>>> combinations. [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > Really, you know, a lot of these little details get left out of the > Adventure Tales in children's books. Until fairly recently, nobody went to the toilet, even in adult books, and for children toilets figure quite large. SignatureRob Bannister > I read in a book that seemed to be serious and reputable that the early > explorers and fur traders with the Hudson Bay Company and rivals wore [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > dress that way, or you freeze, campfires not being the most efficient of > heating systems. I don't suppose anyone else here will spend much time sleeping in the rough involuntarily, but you are better off if you have bedding if you remove clothing (wool possibly excepted) to air while you sleep. Presperation occurs even when it seems quite cold. Dry clothing in the morning will serve better. > Really, you know, a lot of these little details get left out of the > Adventure Tales in children's books. SignatureLars Eighner <http://larseighner.com/> September 5851, 1993 230 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 read in a book that seemed to be serious and reputable that the early >> explorers and fur traders with the Hudson Bay Company and rivals wore [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >occurs even when it seems quite cold. Dry clothing in the morning will >serve better. True, but as you suggest, wool is one of the few materials that will still keep you warm when the fabric is wet. SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs, who speaks AmE, lives near Dublin, Ireland and usually spells in BrE >Peter Duncanson (BrE) wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >And weren't children sewn into them at the beginning of winter and not >let out until spring? Or is that a myth? No, it's a moth. Sewn in by the mother. Come to think of it, you don't hear much about clothes moths these days. Did moth balls really work? SignaturePaul In alt.usage.english, Paul Wolff wrote: >>Peter Duncanson (BrE) wrote: >>> [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >No, it's a moth. Sewn in by the mother. Come to think of it, you don't >hear much about clothes moths these days. We've had clothes moths here. >Did moth balls really work? We use cedar blocks among the clothes. They seem to work, but see: http://www.wisegeek.com/does-cedar-actually-repel-moths.htm Our kitchen cupboards are also lined with cedar, to repel grain moths etc. I don't know whether it works but the aroma is quite pleasant. SignatureMike Barnes Cheshire, England >In alt.usage.english, Paul Wolff wrote: >>Come to think of it, you don't >>hear much about clothes moths these days. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >Our kitchen cupboards are also lined with cedar, to repel grain moths >etc. I don't know whether it works but the aroma is quite pleasant. Will bear that in mind for the upcoming refit. SignaturePaul >> Peter Duncanson (BrE) wrote: >>> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > No, it's a moth. Sewn in by the mother. Come to think of it, you don't > hear much about clothes moths these days. Did moth balls really work? If there're no moths around now, I'd say the moths' balls had ceased to function. SignatureRob Bannister >>> Peter Duncanson (BrE) wrote: >>>> On Sun, 06 Sep 2009 14:19:18 +0100, Chuck Riggs [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > If there're no moths around now, I'd say the moths' balls had ceased > to function. Can't resist: Q: Where can I find moth balls? A: Well, you just pull their little legs apart and look. SignatureMaria Conlon [...] > Can't resist: > > Q: Where can I find moth balls? > A: Well, you just pull their little legs apart and look. Then there's that terrifically long shaggy-dog story that concludes "Have you ever seen a moth bawl?" SignatureCordially, Eric Walker, Owlcroft House http://owlcroft.com/english/ >>Except for the trousers I buy with suit jackets, all of my clothes are >>combinations. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >"combinations" for a single garment (along the lines of pants and >trousers). I certainly agree that "combinations" is dated. I used it out of laziness -- an unwillingness at the time to explain why I did -- because it was mentioned upthread. So much for trying to save myself an explanation. SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs, who speaks AmE, lives near Dublin, Ireland and usually spells in BrE >In AmE, when suite means furnishings for one room, it is pronounced suit. >The other pronunciation would imply to some furnishings for a suite of rooms. False generalization. In my dialect of AmE, "suite" is always pronounced "sweet", never "suit", no matter the meaning. -GAWollman SignatureGarrett A. Wollman | What intellectual phenomenon can be older, or more oft wollman@bimajority.org| repeated, than the story of a large research program Opinions not shared by| that impaled itself upon a false central assumption my employers. | accepted by all practitioners? - S.J. Gould, 1993 > the lovely and talented Peter Moylan broadcast on alt.usage.english: >>> [...] [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > The other pronunciation would imply to some furnishings for a suite of > rooms. My impression: either "suite" was mispronounced as "suit" or sounded like a fancier way of saying "suit" (as in furniture). That is, I think (no proof) that "suite" came after "suit" in the USA at some point. I could well be wrong, because I'm basing the opinion on when I first heard "suite" used (after hearing "bedroom/living room suit" [and "set"]). Note: I grew up in circumstances possible vastly different from those of some others in the group, and perceptions vary from time to time and from place to place. (Am I hedging enough?) SignatureMaria Conlon > [...] > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > I can't recall seeing or hearing "chaise lounge" in BrE, nor "suit" for > furniture. I've never seen "suit" of furniture here, but I've heard it on commercials. I don't think I've ever heard that pronunciation for suites of rooms or dances. -- Jerry Friedman >>> Kalmia wrote, in >>> <fac0f65a-3bfc-4502-ab9a-6e56d160b...@y20g2000vbk.googlegroups.com> [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > customers would have the slightest idea what a suite of furniture might > be (but they knew well what a suit of furniture typically included). Just as confusingly, I have people use "suite" to refer to what I call a settee (in my country of adoption, apparently only "sofa" or "couch" are allowed). SignatureRob Bannister >Just as confusingly, I have people use "suite" to refer to what I call a >settee (in my country of adoption, apparently only "sofa" or "couch" are >allowed). I've never heard (BrE) a settee called a suite, but a settee and 2 armchairs is/are called "a 3-piece suite". >> Just as confusingly, I have people use "suite" to refer to what I call a >> settee (in my country of adoption, apparently only "sofa" or "couch" are >> allowed). > > I've never heard (BrE) a settee called a suite, but a settee and 2 armchairs is/are > called "a 3-piece suite". I meant to write "I have heard people", and I should have added "a few (ignorant)". SignatureRob Bannister > A chaise lounge is an item that may be included in a suit of furniture. Do you have to wear a lounge suit to use it? SignatureSome say the world will end in fire; some say in segfaults. [XKCD 312] Quoth Nick Spalding <spalding@iol.ie>, and I quote: >Kalmia wrote, in ><fac0f65a-3bfc-4502-ab9a-6e56d160bb35@y20g2000vbk.googlegroups.com> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >They're wrong. And they have been wrong for a surprisingly long time. Here's an example from 1809, from The Gentleman's Magazine, published in London, England: http://books.google.com/books?id=Kq_PAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA251#v=onepage&q=&f=false SignatureJames > And they have been wrong for a surprisingly long time. Here's an > example from 1809, from The Gentleman's Magazine, published in [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > -- > James Ah....so comforting to know. At least it's not a recent American dumbdowner. > I thought the words came straight out of the French - chaise longue. > But everyone I hear, even a teacher-friend who knows some French, > calls it a chaise lounge. Et plus d'horreur: A "Le Corbusier chaise lounge" even, (15.000 of them) Jan |
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.