 |
 | 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 / January 2010Waugh: faithful old body
Hello: "body" is this in the meaning of "person," "someone?" ----- [Anthony Blanche meets Ryder after several years, but he's followed his career from a distance] "I've been watching you, my dear. I'm a faithful old body and I've kept my eye on you" Evelyn Waugh, Brideshead Revisited, p. 820 ---- -- Thanks. Marius Hancu Marius Hancu wrote, in <8d134067-a88d-4cc0-b686-35adfddcbd95@j4g2000yqe.googlegroups.com> on Mon, 4 Jan 2010 03:28:42 -0800 (PST): > Hello: > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Evelyn Waugh, Brideshead Revisited, p. 820 Person is right. A similar idiom would be 'faithful old thing'.  SignatureNick Spalding BrE/IrE >Marius Hancu wrote, in ><8d134067-a88d-4cc0-b686-35adfddcbd95@j4g2000yqe.googlegroups.com> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > >Person is right. A similar idiom would be 'faithful old thing'. As says OED of "body": 13. A human being of either sex, an individual. Formerly, as still dialectally, and in the combinations ANY-, EVERY-, NO-, SOME-BODY, etc., exactly equivalent to the current ‘person’; but now only as a term of familiarity, with a tinge of compassion, and generally with adjectives implying this. "Body" also exists in a combination that does not convey compassion, "busybody": a. An officious or meddlesome person; one who is improperly busy in other people's affairs SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) On Jan 4, 7:03 am, "Peter Duncanson (BrE)" <m...@peterduncanson.net> wrote: > On Mon, 04 Jan 2010 11:32:15 +0000, Nick Spalding <spald...@iol.ie> > >> "body" > >> is this in the meaning of "person," "someone?" [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > term of familiarity, with a tinge of compassion, and generally with > adjectives implying this. OK, this seems quite significant. > "Body" also exists in a combination that does not convey compassion, > "busybody": > > a. An officious or meddlesome person; one who is improperly busy in > other people's affairs This I know. Thank you both. Marius Hancu > > >> "body" > > >> is this in the meaning of "person," "someone?" [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > OK, this seems quite significant. Also to me this is something that would tend to be used more by women - specifically older women and it's a bit lower-middle class. I've not read Brideshead, but to me that 'body' combines with 'my dear' to suggest Anthony Blanche is a tad 'camp'. DC -- Django Cat wrote, in <NaX0n.22525$Ym4.17112@text.news.virginmedia.com> on Wed, 06 Jan 2010 07:43:41 GMT: > > > >> "body" > > > >> is this in the meaning of "person," "someone?" [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > read Brideshead, but to me that 'body' combines with 'my dear' to > suggest Anthony Blanche is a tad 'camp'. Much more than a tad. SignatureNick Spalding BrE/IrE > Django Cat wrote, in <NaX0n.22525$Ym4.17...@text.news.virginmedia.com> > > > > >> "body" > > > > >> is this in the meaning of "person," "someone?" [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > Much more than a tad. Indeed. Marius Hancu > Django Cat wrote, in <NaX0n.22525$Ym4.17112@text.news.virginmedia.com> > on Wed, 06 Jan 2010 07:43:41 GMT: [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > > Much more than a tad. Not based on S** Anthony Bl*** the well-known fifth man, then? I really must read Brideshead one of these days - and I only ever watched about one episode of the TV version. DC -- >> Django Cat wrote, in <NaX0n.22525$Ym4.17112@text.news.virginmedia.com> >> on Wed, 06 Jan 2010 07:43:41 GMT: [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > really must read Brideshead one of these days - and I only ever watched > about one episode of the TV version. What a relief! I thought I was alone in these lacunae of cultural appreciation. I did purchase a copy of the book but never got beyond page one, although I did manage to contribute to a book group discussion on it without anyone catching me out. One seems to absorb a great deal by some sort of osmosis: Son claims to have passed English at GCSE and A level without ever having actually read any of the set texts. SignatureLaura (emulate St. George for email) > > > Django Cat wrote, in > > > <NaX0n.22525$Ym4.17112@text.news.virginmedia.com> [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > English at GCSE and A level without ever having actually read any of > the set texts. There is that - but to be honest when Jeremy Irons and that posh lad with the teddy bear were all over the TV schedules, I just thought 'I can't be doing with these people'. DC -- [...]>>> >>> Not based on S** Anthony Bl*** the well-known fifth man, then? I >>> really must read Brideshead one of these days - and I only ever [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > with the teddy bear were all over the TV schedules, I just thought 'I > can't be doing with these people'. I enjoyed the telly version, but have never read the book, which is, I gather, even more of a load of sentimental tosh. On bluffing one's way in Eng. Lit., one of my sister's university teachers confessed, in a session of "Humiliation", to not having read a certain book. A mental bell rang, and she was able to say reproachfully, "But you marked my essay on it!" SignatureMike. >[...]>>> >>>> Not based on S** Anthony Bl*** the well-known fifth man, then? I [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >I enjoyed the telly version, but have never read the book, which is, I >gather, even more of a load of sentimental tosh. I think you have that backwards. The TV version was tosh; the book is not. Wasn't Blunt too late to have got into BR? Katy [...] >> I enjoyed the telly version, but have never read the book, which is, >> I gather, even more of a load of sentimental tosh. > > I think you have that backwards. The TV version was tosh; the book > is not. Is that so? I'll put it on the list, then: it's one of the few EWs I haven't read, so it would be silly to miss it out, anyhow. > Wasn't Blunt too late to have got into BR? He wasn't much younger, but do we know they actually met? And the Burgess and MacLean thing was later than Brideshead, so there wouldn't have been a retrospective dig. SignatureMike. >> I >> really must read Brideshead one of these days - and I only ever watched [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >by some sort of osmosis: Son claims to have passed English at GCSE and A >level without ever having actually read any of the set texts. Oh, I've lost count of the number of classic books I haven't actually read. I used to think I'd remedy this one day (and I do even possess one or two of them), but I've now decided there are much better things to do with the rest of my life. Osmosis is a wonderful thing. SignatureKaty Jennison spamtrap: remove the first two letters after the @ >>> I >>> really must read Brideshead one of these days - and I only ever watched [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >one or two of them), but I've now decided there are much better things >to do with the rest of my life. Osmosis is a wonderful thing. I read most of Withering Heights for O level, but got bored and read the York Notes for the rest. After which I realised that while there is probably loads of stuff I "ought to" read, I'd rather enjoy what I read. So it's osmosis for culture and sci-fi/fantasy for fun! >>>> I >>>> really must read Brideshead one of these days - and I only ever watched [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > is probably loads of stuff I "ought to" read, I'd rather enjoy what I > read. So it's osmosis for culture and sci-fi/fantasy for fun! But aue is the only environment in which I sometimes wish I had actually read some of the stuff I just know. (I wanted to write "osmosed".) In Waterstone's on Monday I got carried away with the three quid bargains and managed to buy a book I already owned which was a rather depressing experience. It wasn't very good, either, so not something I'd want to pass on to a friend. SignatureLaura (emulate St. George for email) > >>> I > >>> really must read Brideshead one of these days - and I only ever [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > is probably loads of stuff I "ought to" read, I'd rather enjoy what I > read. So it's osmosis for culture and sci-fi/fantasy for fun! I know the story of '1984' from hearsay backwards, forwards and side to side - but I've never read it or seen any of the films. DC -- >> >>> I >> >>> really must read Brideshead one of these days - and I only ever [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > >DC Someone made a lousy film, IMO, out of a great book. SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs, An American who lives near Dublin, Ireland and usually spells in BrE >>> >>> I >>> >>> really must read Brideshead one of these days - and I only [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > > Someone made a lousy film, IMO, out of a great book. I saw this film on TV at some earlier point. (Theatre version released in 1956) Considering the era, it was really not bad at all. And I disagree about the 1984 version being a lousy film. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0048918/ >>>> >>> I >>>> >>> really must read Brideshead one of these days - and I only [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] >And I disagree about the 1984 version being a lousy film. >http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0048918/ Note my "IMO" above, but the Radio Times Film Guide, which I read religiously, agrees with you, Pat: http://www.radiotimes.com/servlet_film/com.icl.beeb.rtfilms.client.simpleSearchS ervlet?frn=11994&searchTypeSelect=5 SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs, An American who lives near Dublin, Ireland and usually spells in BrE >>>>> I read most of Withering Heights for O level, but got bored and >>>>> read [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > http://www.radiotimes.com/servlet_film/com.icl.beeb.rtfilms.client.simpleSearchS ervlet?frn=11994&searchTypeSelect=5 Oh, one's opinion is always a given on a newsgroup, Chuck. So much of what we discuss is subject to de gustibus. >>>>>> I read most of Withering Heights for O level, but got bored and >>>>>> read [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > >Oh, one's opinion is always a given on a newsgroup, Chuck. Wrong, wrong, wrongity wrong, Pat, if you'll excuse me for being so blunt. When I forget to stick an IMO after one of my opinions, I catch holy hell from one or more of the ladies here. I become so embarrassed by these chastisements, I write a dozen IMHO posts the next day. >So much of >what we discuss is subject to de gustibus. Gesundheit. SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs, An American who lives near Dublin, Ireland and usually spells in BrE >>>> I >>>> really must read Brideshead one of these days - and I only ever watched [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >is probably loads of stuff I "ought to" read, I'd rather enjoy what I >read. So it's osmosis for culture and sci-fi/fantasy for fun! After seeing the film several times, I was greatly disappointed by the book version of Wuthering Heights. SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs, An American who lives near Dublin, Ireland and usually spells in BrE > On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 15:18:14 +0000, LFS > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > one or two of them), but I've now decided there are much better things > to do with the rest of my life. Osmosis is a wonderful thing. At risk of being called for stating the bleeding obvious, they're "classics" for a reason. I resisted the lure of the canon of Eng. Lit. for years until I met my dear wife, an Eng. Lit. BA who started me off on Jane Austen and Charlotte Bronte before getting me hooked on George Eliot (the greatest novelist ever), Leo Tolstoy (okay, maybe he was the greatest novelist ever) and then non-osmotically to point various north, south, past and present. I can't think of anything better to do with one's life than read a great book, and since the canon exists, why not start there? Having said that, I'm half way through the second volume of Peter F Hamilton's "The Temporal Void": canonical it ain't, but a damn good read it is. > Having said that, I'm half way through the second volume of Peter F > Hamilton's "The Temporal Void": canonical it ain't, but a damn good > read it is. In my extensive book collection I have just three books that I never managed to finish. One is by Edward Gibbon. The other two are by Peter Hamilton. SignaturePeter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org For an e-mail address, see my web page. Django Cat wrote, in <BH11n.22695$Ym4.6693@text.news.virginmedia.com> on Wed, 06 Jan 2010 15:08:17 GMT: > > Django Cat wrote, in <NaX0n.22525$Ym4.17112@text.news.virginmedia.com> > > on Wed, 06 Jan 2010 07:43:41 GMT: [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > > Not based on S** Anthony Bl*** the well-known fifth man, then? Dear me no, he was at Cambridge. > I really must read Brideshead one of these days - and I only ever watched > about one episode of the TV version. > > DC SignatureNick Spalding BrE/IrE > Django Cat wrote, in <BH11n.22695$Ym4.6693@text.news.virginmedia.com> > on Wed, 06 Jan 2010 15:08:17 GMT: [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > > Dear me no, he was at Cambridge. Bless my soul, what a mistake to have made. DC -- |
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.