 |
 | 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 / February 2010New word!
We've had the second blizzard of an unusually mild winter (for us) and on Saturday I was rather annoyed to discover that someone had taken it all too seriously (or possibly considered the fact that they hadn't cleared the steps or the parking lot) and closed the building containing the public library for that day as well as the day of the storm. This was announced on large typed signs stating "Building Closed Due To Inclimate Weather". I suppose it is some consolation when considering climate change to know that our local weather is not connected with the climate any more!  SignatureCheryl > We've had the second blizzard of an unusually mild winter (for us) > and on Saturday I was rather annoyed to discover that someone had [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > know that our local weather is not connected with the climate any > more! I got 382 Google hits for "inclimate weather". That includes a warning against it in The Oxford Dictionary of American Usage and Style. A semantic parallel is the German word for a storm, "Unwetter", literally "un-weather". SignatureJames > > We've had the second blizzard of an unusually mild winter (for us) > > and on Saturday I was rather annoyed to discover that someone had [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > A semantic parallel is the German word for a storm, "Unwetter", > literally "un-weather". I think I'll start referring to unusually hot or cold conditions as "intemperatures". -- Jerry Friedman >> > We've had the second blizzard of an unusually mild winter (for us) >> > and on Saturday I was rather annoyed to discover that someone had [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >I think I'll start referring to unusually hot or cold conditions as >"intemperatures". This winter, it's been distemperatures. SignatureJohn >We've had the second blizzard of an unusually mild winter (for us) and >on Saturday I was rather annoyed to discover that someone had taken it [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >I suppose it is some consolation when considering climate change to know >that our local weather is not connected with the climate any more! Re: Blizzard. The OED defines it as: furious blast of frost-wind and blinding snow, in which man and beast frequently perish; a ‘snow-squall’. Also attrib. and Comb. orig. U.S. That is my understanding of a blizzard. A strong wind is an essential feature of a blizzard. However much snow might fall, without the "furious blast" it is not a blizzard. Some news reporters in the UK seem to use "blizzard" of any snowfall that leaves more than a couple of centimetres of white stuff on the ground even when there is no wind. Do I have too narrow understanding of the word? SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) >Re: Blizzard. > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > >Do I have too narrow understanding of the word? That's my understanding, too. It's shaped almost entirely, I realise, by the blizzard in Arthur Ransome's "Winter Holiday", which drives Dick and Dorothea's ice-sledge up the lake. SignatureKaty Jennison spamtrap: remove the first two letters after the @ >>Re: Blizzard. >> [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >by the blizzard in Arthur Ransome's "Winter Holiday", which drives >Dick and Dorothea's ice-sledge up the lake. One of a set of books that were a major influence on me. I haven't reread them for a few years. SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) >>>Re: Blizzard. >>> [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > One of a set of books that were a major influence on me. I haven't > reread them for a few years. I've just bought S&A for my eldest, I'm interested to see if it's now getting too dated or whether it can grip this generation the way it did me and my mother. SignatureOnline waterways route planner | http://canalplan.eu Plan trips, see photos, check facilities | http://canalplan.org.uk Nick wrote, in <87hbpsyg3v.fsf@temporary-address.org.uk> on Sun, 07 Feb 2010 19:56:36 +0000: > >>>Re: Blizzard. > >>> [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > getting too dated or whether it can grip this generation the way it did > me and my mother. I must try them on my grandchildren. SignatureNick Spalding BrE/IrE > Nick wrote, in <87hbpsyg3v.fsf@temporary-address.org.uk> > on Sun, 07 Feb 2010 19:56:36 +0000: [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > > I must try them on my grandchildren. What has happened to the other boat-children books? Adrian Seligman was one writier I remember, but he wasn't alone. S&A were comfort reads, while the others had a harder edge, IIRC. There was a non-boaty one I remember with as much admiration as vagueness, called "Fell Farm Holiday". One of the Australian ones (with titles like _That Must Be Julian_) even had the heroes making a harpoon gun and nailing sharks with it: these they sold to a caricature Italian dealer. SignatureMike. > One of the Australian ones (with titles like _That Must Be Julian_) even > had the heroes making a harpoon gun and nailing sharks with it: these > they sold to a caricature Italian dealer. A dealer in caricature Italians? The mind boggles. SignatureLaura (emulate St. George for email) >> One of the Australian ones (with titles like _That Must Be Julian_) >> even had the heroes making a harpoon gun and nailing sharks with it: >> these they sold to a caricature Italian dealer. > > A dealer in caricature Italians? The mind boggles. Dealing in real Italians would have been unlawful. "Indentured labour", even for Islanders, had been abolished by then. SignatureMike. Mike Lyle wrote, in <hkngtr$kei$1@news.eternal-september.org> on Sun, 7 Feb 2010 23:04:28 -0000: > What has happened to the other boat-children books? Adrian Seligman was > one writier I remember, but he wasn't alone. S&A were comfort reads, [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > had the heroes making a harpoon gun and nailing sharks with it: these > they sold to a caricature Italian dealer. Another non-boaty, but horsy one was "Far Distant Oxus" written when they were teenagers by Katharine Hull and Pamela Whitlock, with some sequels. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Far-Distant_Oxus> SignatureNick Spalding BrE/IrE >What has happened to the other boat-children books? Adrian Seligman was >one writier I remember, but he wasn't alone. S&A were comfort reads, >while the others had a harder edge, IIRC. There was a non-boaty one I >remember with as much admiration as vagueness, called "Fell Farm >Holiday". I re-read "Fell Farm for Christmas" the other month, having come across it (as one does) in one of my bookshelves. I think Arther Ransome has probably worn better, but there's still a certain retro charm. SignatureKaty Jennison spamtrap: remove the first two letters after the @ >> What has happened to the other boat-children books? Adrian Seligman >> was one writier I remember, but he wasn't alone. S&A were comfort [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Ransome has probably worn better, but there's still a certain retro > charm. Oh, that's a shame: I was looking forward to finding it again. I remember now that another one of the boaty writers was Aubrey de Selincourt. Did anybody else read all those rather ethnic Irish ones? Not only the sweepingly-illustrated Legendary Tales (Kinchin-Smith and Melluish, I think), but _The Dark Sailor of Youghal_ and many others. Was one of the authors called Patricia Lynch? SignatureMike. > Did anybody else read all those rather ethnic Irish ones? Not only the > sweepingly-illustrated Legendary Tales (Kinchin-Smith and Melluish, I > think), but _The Dark Sailor of Youghal_ and many others. Was one of the > authors called Patricia Lynch? She wrote Long Ears, one of my favourites as a child. But I hesitate to reread it. It might spoil the magic. SignatureLaura (emulate St. George for email) >>> What has happened to the other boat-children books? Adrian Seligman >>> was one writier I remember, but he wasn't alone. S&A were comfort [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >remember now that another one of the boaty writers was Aubrey de >Selincourt. Oh yes, I remember de Selincourt, too. Mike, if you email me your address (avoiding my spam trap) I'll put "Fell Farm for Christmas" in the post for you. SignatureKaty Jennison spamtrap: remove the first two letters after the @ >>>> What has happened to the other boat-children books? Adrian Seligman >>>> was one writier I remember, but he wasn't alone. S&A were comfort [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > Mike, if you email me your address (avoiding my spam trap) I'll put > "Fell Farm for Christmas" in the post for you. That's, um, mighty white-Christmas of you, Katy! I'll do so. SignatureMike. >>>Re: Blizzard. >>> [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > One of a set of books that were a major influence on me. I haven't > reread them for a few years. Doesn't a "snow storm" also imply a strong wind. I know the phrase "storm of the century" was used for the recent East Coast snow fall. >>>>Re: Blizzard. >>>> [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] >Doesn't a "snow storm" also imply a strong wind. I know the phrase >"storm of the century" was used for the recent East Coast snow fall. The OED says that a snowstorm is "A storm accompanied by a heavy fall of snow", a rainstorm is "A storm accompanied by heavy rain" but that a hail-storm is "A violent fall or storm of hail". It says a storm is: I. 1. a. A violent disturbance of the atmosphere, manifested by high winds, often accompanied by heavy falls of rain, hail, or snow, by thunder and lightning, and at sea by turbulence of the waves. [1] Hence sometimes applied to a heavy fall of rain, hail, or snow, or to a violent outbreak of thunder and lightning, unaccompanied by strong wind. b. Used spec. as the distinctive appellation of a particular degree of violence in wind. In mod. Meteorology: An atmospheric disturbance which in the Beaufort scale is classed as intermediate between a whole gale and a hurricane, having a wind-force estimated at 10-11 and a limit of velocity at from 56-75 miles per hour. [1] That seems to contradict the definitions of snowstorm and rainstorm which imply that wind is part of such a storm. SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) James Silverton: > Doesn't a "snow storm" also imply a strong wind. To me, "storm" implies intense weather conditions of some kind associated with precipitation, but not necessarily wind. A rainstorm could be a vertical downpour and a snowstorm could be a heavy fall of snow without wind. If you add wind to the snow, what you have is a blizzard. A weather system with sustained freezing rain leaving a significant coating of ice on the ground seems to be being called an "ice storm" these days, although I personally prefer to just speak of freezing rain. Anyway, freezing rain is hardly ever accompaned by wind. "Storm" also implies that it lasts more than a few minutes. If the rain or snow is intense but brief, then it's only a rain shower or a snow flurry, not a storm. SignatureMark Brader "You have the right to remain silent. Anything you Toronto do say can and will be misquoted and used against msb@vex.net you in a future post." -- Tanja Cooper, misquoted My text in this article is in the public domain. >>>>Re: Blizzard. >>>> [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] >> >Doesn't a "snow storm" also imply a strong wind. I'd say so. On the other hand, the wind may be calm during a "heavy snowfall", and very often is. SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs, An American who lives near Dublin, Ireland and usually spells in BrE On Feb 7, 3:08 pm, "James Silverton" <not.jim.silver...@verizon.net> wrote: > >>>Re: Blizzard. > [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > Doesn't a "snow storm" also imply a strong wind. I know the phrase > "storm of the century" was used for the recent East Coast snow fall. Judging by the local media's usage, "storm of the century" is completely idiomatic. It designates the first moderately large storm of the year. >Judging by the local media's usage, "storm of the century" is >completely idiomatic. It designates the first moderately large storm >of the year. Given that the current century is only a little more than nine years on, it isn't that big a deal to be the "storm of the century". The current storms definitely seem to qualify up to this point. Signature************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * >> Judging by the local media's usage, "storm of the century" is >> completely idiomatic. It designates the first moderately large storm [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > century". The current storms definitely seem to qualify up to > this point. It's a silly way to measure, though. Why were all the counters reset when we passed the arbitrary 2001 marker? "The worst storm since 1910" would be worth talking about. Someone ought to point out to the news people that the storm of the decade was just as bad as the storm of the century. SignaturePeter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org For an e-mail address, see my web page. >>> Judging by the local media's usage, "storm of the century" is >>> completely idiomatic. It designates the first moderately large [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Someone ought to point out to the news people that the storm of the > decade was just as bad as the storm of the century. The Brit meeja do seem to use the "since n" formula. Memorably extreme weather isn't particularly frequent here; but it happened that this winter they had the rare treat of being able to use "since last winter". SignatureMike. >> Judging by the local media's usage, "storm of the century" is >> completely idiomatic. It designates the first moderately large storm [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > century". The current storms definitely seem to qualify up to > this point. I always interpreted such comments as meaning 'in the last hundred years'. Of course, the media use the term much more loosely, but I think engineers have ways of figuring out how to build things that will stand the worst storm an area is likely to experience in a hundred years. That's where I thought the idea came from. Of course, sometimes just after the transmission line or whatever is built, there's a storm that's a LOT worse than anything seen in the last hundred years. SignatureCheryl >>> Judging by the local media's usage, "storm of the century" is >>> completely idiomatic. It designates the first moderately large storm [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >built, there's a storm that's a LOT worse than anything seen in the last >hundred years. It's tempting to take "storm of the century" as meaning "100-year storm" in the same manner as "100-year flood", but it isn't at all the same. I suspect, though, that the media don't know the difference and are wrongly labelling "100-year storm" (which can happen twice within a century or even twice within a decade, or even more often). Signature************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * >>>> Judging by the local media's usage, "storm of the century" is >>>> completely idiomatic. It designates the first moderately large storm [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > wrongly labelling "100-year storm" (which can happen twice within a > century or even twice within a decade, or even more often). "Heaviest snowfall ever recorded" is pretty good -- that what the news here has been reporting for the District of Columbia, which is still digging out. (We have one thing here in New Jersey that they don't have: almost enough plows. And we got no snow at all at my latitude in the last storm; not so lucky tonight, it seems; more than a foot is expected.) 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 ) > "Heaviest snowfall ever recorded" is pretty good -- that what the news > here has been reporting for the District of Columbia, which is still > digging out. (We have one thing here in New Jersey that they don't have: > almost enough plows. And we got no snow at all at my latitude in the > last storm; not so lucky tonight, it seems; more than a foot is expected.) One very memorable winter we had the most snow accumulate in recorded history (most winters it falls, partly melts, falls, melts some more etc). This would sound more impressive if 'recorded history' were actually something like the period of time people have been writing things down about the place, say, 500 years or so. In fact, they meant the period of time since people started writing down official weather observations, which was only in the 1800s, as far as I can recall. It was an extraordinary amount of snow, but unlike the recent US example, it didn't all fall at the same time. I gather a visiting expert in something or other, originally from France, left with a huge sigh of relief after our most recent blizzard, saying she'd never seen anything like it in her life, and couldn't get over how everyone just took it in stride, already had their snow tires on and their snow shovels and heavy jackets ready...it was just a fairly typical blizzard, honestly! SignatureCheryl > > "Heaviest snowfall ever recorded" is pretty good -- that what the news > > here has been reporting for the District of Columbia, which is still [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > It was an extraordinary amount of snow, but unlike the recent US > example, it didn't all fall at the same time. The Washington, DC area is approaching the most accumulation in a similar "recorded history". It's been split up between 3 major storms (one in mid-December, one the past Friday, and one last night) along with several little ones. Prior to last night, we'd received 45" (114.3 cm) of snow this year--the record was 54.4" (138.2 cm) in the winter of 1898-99. It's possible that the storm last night surpassed that record. I view this from 2 perspectives. On the one hand, the 45" we'd received through yesterday was more snow than in the previous 4 years combined. On the other hand, I grew up in Maine; my town averaged over 65" a year and occasionally got 150" (381 cm) or more--which is peanuts compared to the 1000" (25 m) or more that some of the ski areas in the mountains out West get in a good year. > The Washington, DC area is approaching the most accumulation in a > similar "recorded history". It's been split up between 3 major storms [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > the winter of 1898-99. It's possible that the storm last night > surpassed that record. The record was broken; the weatherpersons on TV were hyperventilating about being present when history was made. The official numbers are collected at National Airport, which is right down on the river. Go a few miles away and many places have totals five or ten inches higher, maybe more. > I view this from 2 perspectives. On the one hand, the 45" we'd > received through yesterday was more snow than in the previous 4 years > combined. On the other hand, I grew up in Maine; my town averaged > over 65" a year and occasionally got 150" (381 cm) or more--which is > peanuts compared to the 1000" (25 m) or more that some of the ski > areas in the mountains out West get in a good year. Oh you don't have to tell me about that. I used to have to trudge two miles to school through the snow uphill in both directions. SignatureJohn Varela Trade NEWlamps for OLDlamps for email Roland Hutchinson: >> "Heaviest snowfall ever recorded" is pretty good -- that what the news >> here has been reporting for the District of Columbia, which is still >> digging out. ... >> almost enough plows. And we got no snow at all at my latitude in the >> last storm; not so lucky tonight, it seems; more than a foot is expected.) Cheryl Perkins: > One very memorable winter we had the most snow accumulate in recorded > history (most winters it falls, partly melts, falls, melts some more etc). > > This would sound more impressive if 'recorded history' [did not mean] > they meant the period of time since people started writing down > official weather observations, which was only in the 1800s... Yep. But I'm still going to mention that in 2009 Toronto set an all-time record (the beginning of time, in this case, being 1847) for snowfall in the month of November. Zero. SignatureMark Brader | "A colorful quilt reflecting the dispersed development msb@vex.net | of the nation. A sentence fragment." Toronto | --Eric Walker My text in this article is in the public domain. "Peter Duncanson (BrE)" <mail@peterduncanson.net> wrote : > Re: Blizzard. > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > that leaves more than a couple of centimetres of white stuff on the > ground even when there is no wind. I used to be perplexed by this habit too. On one occasion, probably about 15 years ago, I was so perplexed with the use of "flash flood" to describe six inches of water under a railway bridge in Neasden that I asked a senior BBC news editor why it happened, and his reply was: "Yes, it's a widespread illness among journalists and there's no known cure. It's called 'adjectival inflation' (even when it manifests itself as one noun replacing another). Thus every accident is 'a serious accident'; every death is 'a tragic death', as if there were any other kind, and in reporting of weather events every snow flurry is 'a blizzard', every rumble of thunder is 'a violent electrical storm', and, yes, six inches of water under a railway bridge in Neasden is 'a flash flood.' Live with it, cos it ain't going to go away." I live with it by telling that story, over and over again. Philip Eden > "Peter Duncanson (BrE)" <mail@peterduncanson.net> wrote : >> Re: Blizzard. [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > > I live with it by telling that story, over and over again. I think we should all tell that and similar stories till it _does_ go away. (Yeah, yeah, I know. The windmills always win the joust.) They wouldn't, yet, call a lettuce a tree, and it's simply lying to say people "panicked" when they didn't, and were "distraught" when they weren't. SignatureMike. >>We've had the second blizzard of an unusually mild winter (for us) and >>on Saturday I was rather annoyed to discover that someone had taken it [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] >feature of a blizzard. However much snow might fall, without the >"furious blast" it is not a blizzard. I've never actually seen a blizzard, but that is what I sould expect If I were told that one were coming. But I've noticed the media seem to have been a bit more careful about "epicentre" when writing about the earthquake in Haiti -- perhaps AUE influenced them. SignatureSteve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk >>> We've had the second blizzard of an unusually mild winter (for us) and >>> on Saturday I was rather annoyed to discover that someone had taken it [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > "epicentre" when writing about the earthquake in Haiti -- perhaps AUE > influenced them. How were they using the term prior to Haiti (i.e. when they weren't so careful)? I'm fairly new to a.u.e. so missed any discussion here on that. SignatureLong-time resident of Adelaide, South Australia, which may or may not influence my opinions. >>>> We've had the second blizzard of an unusually mild winter (for us) >>>> and on Saturday I was rather annoyed to discover that someone had [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > How were they using the term prior to Haiti (i.e. when they weren't so > careful)? I'm fairly new to a.u.e. so missed any discussion here on that. Oh, let me guess. They would use "epicentre" to mean "focus", i.e. the point in the crust where the earthquake started, rather than the point on the surface directly above. SignatureLong-time resident of Adelaide, South Australia, which may or may not influence my opinions. >>> But I've noticed the media seem to have been a bit more careful about >>> "epicentre" when writing about the earthquake in Haiti -- perhaps AUE [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >point in the crust where the earthquake started, rather than the point >on the surface directly above. No, they used it to mean the centre, the point under the ground, where, for example two sides of a fault shifted in relation to each other. And they then referred to the epicentre as "the point above the epicentre". cf "ground zero". SignatureSteve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk >>>> But I've noticed the media seem to have been a bit more careful about >>>> "epicentre" when writing about the earthquake in Haiti -- perhaps AUE [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > No, they used it to mean the centre, the point under the ground, where, for > example two sides of a fault shifted in relation to each other. Yes, that's the focus, isn't it? > And they then > referred to the epicentre as "the point above the epicentre". cf "ground > zero". So they used it to mean two different things, the focus and the epicentre? SignatureLong-time resident of Adelaide, South Australia, which may or may not influence my opinions. >>>>> But I've noticed the media seem to have been a bit more careful about >>>>> "epicentre" when writing about the earthquake in Haiti -- perhaps AUE [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > >So they used it to mean two different things, the focus and the epicentre? No, they used it only to refer to the focus. SignatureSteve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk >>>>> But I've noticed the media seem to have been a bit more careful about >>>>> "epicentre" when writing about the earthquake in Haiti -- perhaps AUE [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >> referred to the epicentre as "the point above the epicentre". cf "ground >> zero". I'm confused. You said one thing. Steve said "No" and then repeated what you had said but in different words. >So they used it to mean two different things, the focus and the epicentre? SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) >>>>>> But I've noticed the media seem to have been a bit more careful about >>>>>> "epicentre" when writing about the earthquake in Haiti -- perhaps AUE [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >I'm confused. You said one thing. Steve said "No" and then repeated what >you had said but in different words. I think we've sorted it out now. SignatureSteve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk Steve Hayes: >> No, they used it to mean the centre, the point under the ground, where, >> for example two sides of a fault shifted in relation to each other. "Annily": > Yes, that's the focus, isn't it? Yes, with earthquakes "focus" and "center" are synonymous terms. SignatureMark Brader, Toronto | "What caused the submarine to sink?" msb@vex.net | "Dad, it was the 20,000 leaks!!" >Steve Hayes: >>> No, they used it to mean the centre, the point under the ground, where, [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Yes, with earthquakes "focus" and "center" are synonymous terms. The earthquake glossary at http://vulcan.wr.usgs.gov/Glossary/Seismicity/earthquake_terminology.html recognizes the term "focus" for the location and depth of the point of first motion but does not give the term "center". It does give the term "hypocenter" for "The calculated location of the focus of an earthquake." Signature************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * >>Steve Hayes: >>>> No, they used it to mean the centre, the point under the ground, where, [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >does give the term "hypocenter" for "The calculated location of >the focus of an earthquake." There is a problem with "hypocenter". OED: 1. The focus of an earthquake, the point within the earth where it originates. 1905 C. DAVISON Study Rec. Earthquakes i. 3 The region within which the displacement occurs is sometimes called the hypocentre, but more frequently the seismic focus, or simply the focus. .... 2. = ground zero (GROUND n. 18). 1960 Observer 29 May 26/1 The Hiroshima survivors are unusual in having experienced a single whole-body exposure, the dose varying according to distance from the hypocentre (point directly beneath centre) of the explosion. 1962 J. F. LOUTIT Irradiation ii. 75 The incidence of leukemia..is high for those who were exposed near to the hypocenter. Sense 1 means the "focus". Sense 2 means "below the focus". SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) >>>Steve Hayes: >>>>> No, they used it to mean the centre, the point under the ground, where, [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > >Sense 1 means the "focus". Sense 2 means "below the focus". Those are two different fields, of course. I suppose seismologists get to define terms anyway they like. Signature************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * > Mark Brader, Toronto | "What caused the submarine to sink?" > msb@vex.net | "Dad, it was the 20,000 leaks!!" How does a submarine empty its toilets? I have this horrible picture of the flush happening in the wrong direction. If the answer is "back in port", you'd need an enormous holding tank for those 20,000 leaks. SignaturePeter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org For an e-mail address, see my web page. Peter Moylan: > How does a submarine empty its toilets? "Very carefully!" SignatureMark Brader | "Some societies define themselves by being open to new Toronto | influences, others define their identity by resisting. msb@vex.net | In either case, they take the consequences." --Donna Richoux >> Mark Brader, Toronto | "What caused the submarine to sink?" >> msb@vex.net | "Dad, it was the 20,000 leaks!!" [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > If the answer is "back in port", you'd need an enormous holding > tank for those 20,000 leaks. I read an entertaining "war" novel in which a novice officer issued a mistaken command while at cruise underwater. For a rapid emergency surfacing movement, one of the orders was "Blow Safeties", which would cause compressed air to eject ballast water from tanks used to establish and trim the boat's depth and attitude. He said, "Blow Sanitaries", and since they were sealed from access to the outside environment the holding tanks reverse-flushed and emptied into the occupied area of the submarine. It's my assumption that Blowing Sanitaries under proper (non-submerged) circumstances is routine. SignatureFrank ess >> Mark Brader, Toronto | "What caused the submarine to sink?" >> msb@vex.net | "Dad, it was the 20,000 leaks!!" [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > If the answer is "back in port", you'd need an enormous holding tank > for those 20,000 leaks. Speaking of toilets that had to empty into something above their level, we had those, complete with clutch and gearshift, at Thule AB. http://home.comcast.net/~skitt99/Toilet.jpg That one was just for peeing. The others had seats and no splash panel. It was not a good idea to lean over them when using the pedal and hand lever. SignatureSkitt (AmE) Peter Moylan wrote, in <J-CdnevrwIw5Gu3WnZ2dnUVZ7shi4p2d@westnet.com.au> on Tue, 09 Feb 2010 08:52:36 +1100: > > Mark Brader, Toronto | "What caused the submarine to sink?" > > msb@vex.net | "Dad, it was the 20,000 leaks!!" [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > If the answer is "back in port", you'd need an enormous holding tank for > those 20,000 leaks. There was a number of valves that had to be operated in the correct sequence that, if done correctly, caused compressed air to flush the toilet to the sea. If done incorrectly the result was called "getting your own back". This is what I was told when on a trip in an old T Class training submarine, whose name I forget, in 1955. SignatureNick Spalding BrE/IrE >Peter Moylan wrote, in <J-CdnevrwIw5Gu3WnZ2dnUVZ7shi4p2d@westnet.com.au> > on Tue, 09 Feb 2010 08:52:36 +1100: [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >your own back". This is what I was told when on a trip in an old T >Class training submarine, whose name I forget, in 1955. In a modern submarine, toilet effluent is stored in holding tanks until the boat comes into port. SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs, An American who lives near Dublin, Ireland and usually spells in BrE >>>> Mark Brader, Toronto | "What caused the submarine to sink?" >>>> msb@vex.net | "Dad, it was the 20,000 leaks!!" [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > In a modern submarine, toilet effluent is stored in holding tanks > until the boat comes into port. Yes, and one of the unloading facilities is at Cape Canaveral AFB, just outside the entrance to a closed area I frequented on my last job. SignatureSkitt (AmE) >>>>> Mark Brader, Toronto | "What caused the submarine to sink?" >>>>> msb@vex.net | "Dad, it was the 20,000 leaks!!" [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >Yes, and one of the unloading facilities is at Cape Canaveral AFB, just >outside the entrance to a closed area I frequented on my last job. When passing through the entrance, I assume you kept on walkin. That's small potatoes, though. The Hunter's Point smell at times beat them all, IME. SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs, An American who lives near Dublin, Ireland and usually spells in BrE >>>>>> Mark Brader, Toronto | "What caused the submarine to sink?" >>>>>> msb@vex.net | "Dad, it was the 20,000 leaks!!" [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > small potatoes, though. The Hunter's Point smell at times beat them > all, IME. Actually, I remember the Cape facility's being smelly only on one occasion. Maybe that's because it wasn't used very much, and everything there was pretty well sealed. It was not a treatment plant, but only a temporary storage facility. SignatureSkitt (AmE) >>>>>>> Mark Brader, Toronto | "What caused the submarine to sink?" >>>>>>> msb@vex.net | "Dad, it was the 20,000 leaks!!" [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] >pretty well sealed. It was not a treatment plant, but only a temporary >storage facility. An interesting thing I remember reading about smells is that the nuances of them are retained in the memory for a very long time. Even now, I can easily "smell", in my mind, the Hunter's Point smell, for example. SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs, An American who lives near Dublin, Ireland and usually spells in BrE >An interesting thing I remember reading about smells is that the >nuances of them are retained in the memory for a very long time. Even >now, I can easily "smell", in my mind, the Hunter's Point smell, for >example. Sometime in the 80s I met a friend at the coffee machine (in the UK, this is) and said "you've just stayed in Howard Johnsons". He looked amazed and asked how I knew. I told him - by the smell, though I hadn't been in one since 1970, and then only for a few days. >>An interesting thing I remember reading about smells is that the >>nuances of them are retained in the memory for a very long time. Even [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >He looked amazed and asked how I knew. I told him - by the smell, though I >hadn't been in one since 1970, and then only for a few days. Strange, isn't it, yet I've had similar experiences. SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs, An American who lives near Dublin, Ireland and usually spells in BrE On Feb 7, 11:23 am, "Peter Duncanson (BrE)" <m...@peterduncanson.net> wrote: > >We've had the second blizzard of an unusually mild winter (for us) and > >on Saturday I was rather annoyed to discover that someone had taken it [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > Do I have too narrow understanding of the word? Funny, shortly after reading that, I saw http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20100206/sc_livescience/whatisablizzard (topical because of the recent "snowmageddon" in the mid-Atlantic region of the U.S., reported here by Bob Lieblich). 'The term "blizzard" is often tossed around when big winter storms blow in. But the National Weather service has an official definition of blizzard: 'A blizzard as a storm with "considerable falling or blowing snow" and winds in excess of 35 mph and visibilities of less than 1/4 mile for at least 3 hours.' -- Jerry Friedman is hoping for snow today. ObBlizzard: >Funny, shortly after reading that, I saw > >http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20100206/sc_livescience/whatisablizzard > >(topical because of the recent "snowmageddon" in the mid-Atlantic >region of the U.S., reported here by Bob Lieblich). I see that storm has its own Wikipedia page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_blizzard_of_2010 Also previously: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_storms_of_2008%E2%80%932009#December Winter storms of 2008–2009 December "Snowmaggedon" was termed for this period of this winter season. Bobby Gray of Moore, Oklahoma first used this phrase in his autobiography discribing the unusual Oklahoma winter. >'The term "blizzard" is often tossed around when big winter storms >blow in. But the National Weather service has an official definition [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >winds in excess of 35 mph and visibilities of less than 1/4 mile for >at least 3 hours.' SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) > On Feb 7, 11:23 am, "Peter Duncanson (BrE)" <m...@peterduncanson.net> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > winds in excess of 35 mph and visibilities of less than 1/4 mile for > at least 3 hours.' Before our yesterday's snow storm in DC the TV weathermen (they're all men) showed maps identifying those counties for which Winter Storm Warnings had been issued and those for which Blizzard Warnings had been issued. The latter were mostly east of DC, but strong winds developed almost everywhere so I think what we had in the Virginia suburbs yesterday was a blizzard. SignatureJohn Varela Trade NEWlamps for OLDlamps for email > On Sun, 7 Feb 2010 19:12:58 UTC, Jerry Friedman > [quoted text clipped - 52 lines] > developed almost everywhere so I think what we had in the Virginia > suburbs yesterday was a blizzard. I don't think the winds here (on the southern edge of Alexandria) got anywhere near what I'd think of as blizzard-force winds. > > On Sun, 7 Feb 2010 19:12:58 UTC, Jerry Friedman > > [quoted text clipped - 55 lines] > I don't think the winds here (on the southern edge of Alexandria) got > anywhere near what I'd think of as blizzard-force winds. We had snow traveling almost horizontally here in McLean, and the people reporting on TV from outdoor locations kept talking about how the blowing snow was stinging them. IIRC there were TV reports of winds in excess of 30 mph with higher gusts. A reporter on the Mall between the Capitol and the Washington Monument said she couldn't see either structure. So if wasn't a blizzard it was damn close. SignatureJohn Varela Trade NEWlamps for OLDlamps for email >> > On Sun, 7 Feb 2010 19:12:58 UTC, Jerry Friedman >> > [quoted text clipped - 62 lines] >between the Capitol and the Washington Monument said she couldn't >see either structure. So if wasn't a blizzard it was damn close. According to http://www.nw-weathernet.com/wx_terms.htm a blizzard "includes winter storm conditions of sustained winds greater than thirty-five mph that cause major blowing and drifting of snow, reducing visibility to less than one-quarter mile" which I see is the same wording at the NOAA site http://www.erh.noaa.gov/er/box/glossary.htm Signature************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * > On Mon, 8 Feb 2010 20:17:11 UTC, "sjdevn...@yahoo.com" > [quoted text clipped - 65 lines] > between the Capitol and the Washington Monument said she couldn't > see either structure. So if wasn't a blizzard it was damn close. It wasn't anything like that here--the wind was basically nonexistent, and I'd be surprised if even what passed for gusts were over 10mph. FWIW, the National Weather Service definition requires 35 mph sustained winds or frequent gusts (plus sub-quarter mile visibility) for 3+ hours. So it sounds like "if it wasn't a blizzard it was damn close" is dead-on in your area! >It wasn't anything like that here--the wind was basically nonexistent, >and I'd be surprised if even what passed for gusts were over 10mph. >FWIW, the National Weather Service definition requires 35 mph >sustained winds or frequent gusts (plus sub-quarter mile visibility) >for 3+ hours. So it sounds like "if it wasn't a blizzard it was damn >close" is dead-on in your area! We here in southern Arizona would appreciate it if y'all would send us about four hours of one of your blizzards.... Signature************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * Hatunen filted: >>It wasn't anything like that here--the wind was basically nonexistent, >>and I'd be surprised if even what passed for gusts were over 10mph. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >We here in southern Arizona would appreciate it if y'all would >send us about four hours of one of your blizzards.... We here in central Arizona would rather not participate in this exchange...we know what happens when locals try to drive in heavy rain and can only imagine the chaos that would ensue if *frozen* water were to fall from the skies....r SignatureA pessimist sees the glass as half empty. An optometrist asks whether you see the glass more full like this?...or like this? >Hatunen filted: >> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >know what happens when locals try to drive in heavy rain and can only imagine >the chaos that would ensue if *frozen* water were to fall from the skies....r I was here in the 1970s when Tucson had seven inches of snow. The first time I'd seen snow that accumulated on the streets. A good time was had by all. I had moved here from Montreal just a few years earlier and thought it was a laugh riot. Signature************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * Hatunen filted: >>We here in central Arizona would rather not participate in this exchange...we >>know what happens when locals try to drive in heavy rain and can only imagine [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >time was had by all. I had moved here from Montreal just a few >years earlier and thought it was a laugh riot. I remember a brief slushy snowfall at my home in the late '80s (in the afternoon, in November!)...stray cats were wandering around apparently thinking "in all my eight years I've never seen anything like this!"...r SignatureA pessimist sees the glass as half empty. An optometrist asks whether you see the glass more full like this?...or like this? >>> Before our yesterday's snow storm in DC the TV weathermen (they're >>> all men) showed maps identifying those counties for which Winter [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > between the Capitol and the Washington Monument said she couldn't > see either structure. So if wasn't a blizzard it was damn close. Here is a story about a snowstorm at Thule Air Base while I was stationed there. Fortunately, I had taken Christmas leave (in the Baltimore area), so I missed that particular storm. I was there for several others, though. http://thulegreenlandsite.com/arctic_storm.html Here are a few of my Thule AB pictures. http://home.comcast.net/~skitt99/thule.html SignatureSkitt (AmE) > > On Sun, 7 Feb 2010 19:12:58 UTC, Jerry Friedman > > > 'A blizzard as a storm with "considerable falling or blowing snow" and > > > winds in excess of 35 mph and visibilities of less than 1/4 mile for [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > I don't think the winds here (on the southern edge of Alexandria) got > anywhere near what I'd think of as blizzard-force winds. I think you'll agree that what's going on today is a blizzard. The map of blizzard warning areas extends all the way along the coast from central Virginia to Montauk. That's what? Close to 300 miles (500 Km)? Roland is getting his today. SignatureJohn Varela Trade NEWlamps for OLDlamps for email John wrote on 10 Feb 2010 18:37:35 GMT: > >> On Sun, 7 Feb 2010 19:12:58 UTC, Jerry Friedman > > >> 'A blizzard as a storm with "considerable falling or > > >> blowing snow" and winds in excess of 35 mph and [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >> Alexandria) got anywhere near what I'd think of as >> blizzard-force winds. > I think you'll agree that what's going on today is a blizzard. > The map of blizzard warning areas extends all the way along > the coast from central Virginia to Montauk. That's what? Close > to 300 miles (500 Km)? Roland is getting his today. There have been a few moments when "blizzard" would have been truly applicable here but the word seems more suitable to what I hear of northern Maryland and Baltimore. There is a noticeable breeze but now little snow-fall. SignatureJames Silverton Potomac, Maryland Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not > On Mon, 8 Feb 2010 20:17:11 UTC, "sjdevn...@yahoo.com" > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > I think you'll agree that what's going on today is a blizzard. Not here; once again, there's been almost no wind. Newscasts from Baltimore look more blizzard-y. >> > On Sun, 7 Feb 2010 19:12:58 UTC, Jerry Friedman > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > central Virginia to Montauk. That's what? Close to 300 miles (500 Km)? > Roland is getting his today. We're still having quite good luck compared to those to the south of us. About a foot has come down and it's now pretty much all over for us. Everything should be dug out and plowed and all roads back to normal usability by sometime tomorrow. Today was a snow day for every school and business I know about. We stayed indoors, watched Julie & Julia on DVD with our upstairs neighbor (worth seeing just to look at the food!--don't miss the close-up of the lobster thermador in the "making of" extra feature), and ate warm and comforting shepherds' pie (cottage pie to you purists) prepared by my spouse. A second pie has been left in the custody of the aforesaid neighbor lest I be tempted to eat it all myself before supper tomorrow. And we are resolved to tackle Julia Child's boeuf bourgignon before the winter's over. 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 ) >> > On Sun, 7 Feb 2010 19:12:58 UTC, Jerry Friedman > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >from central Virginia to Montauk. That's what? Close to 300 miles >(500 Km)? Roland is getting his today. CNN's Becky Anderson, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Becky_Anderson.jpg, told me it was a blizzard, and I wouldn't dare call her a liar. She mentioned the formula for one, which I wanted to write down just for this occasion, but she was too fast for me. SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs, An American who lives near Dublin, Ireland and usually spells in BrE John Varela: > Before our yesterday's snow storm in DC the TV weathermen (they're > all men) showed maps identifying those counties for which Winter > Storm Warnings had been issued and those for which Blizzard Warnings > had been issued. ... Interesting. They do "winter storm warnings" here too, but I've never seen "blizzard warning" as a separate category. Looking down the list at <http://text.weatheroffice.gc.ca/canada_e.html> to see if there were any winter storm warnings anywhere currently, I was surprised to see the current weather in Calgary described as "snow grains". I don't remember ever seeing that usage before either. Looking at the forecast for Calgary for today, I see that it predicts flurries -- nothing about grains in it. I was also interested to see that they expect fog patches there today, even though the high will be only -6 C (21 F); around here, you don't get fog when it's that cold. SignatureMark Brader | "If the standard says that [things] depend on the Toronto | phase of the moon, the programmer should be prepared msb@vex.net | to look out the window as necessary." -- Chris Torek My text in this article is in the public domain. > John Varela: >> Before our yesterday's snow storm in DC the TV weathermen (they're [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Interesting. They do "winter storm warnings" here too, but I've never > seen "blizzard warning" as a separate category. It's possible that a new category has been introduced. The Fire Service here used to rate the fire danger on any particular day on a five-step scale going from "Low" to "Extreme". (I might have the terms wrong; I can't find information about the old system.) In the last couple of years, with the increasing severity of bush fires, there have been too many cases of fires that simply didn't fit into that scale. A new level "catastrophic" has now been added. The definition is something like: don't expect to survive if you don't leave immediately. Your house is going to be burnt down, and people will die, no matter what. This is too big for the Fire Brigade to handle. SignaturePeter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org For an e-mail address, see my web page. > -- > Jerry Friedman is hoping for snow today. Me too. This hot weather is getting me down. SignaturePeter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org For an e-mail address, see my web page. > 'The term "blizzard" is often tossed around when big winter storms > blow in. But the National Weather service has an official definition [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > winds in excess of 35 mph and visibilities of less than 1/4 mile for > at least 3 hours.' Up here in the Frozen North-ish of Central New York (State, US), we have a veritable Esquimaux-level vocabulary for snow. Flurries are light, intermittent snowfall. Squalls are much heavier, but still intermittent, snow. Show showers are similar to flurries, but somewhat less intermittent. "Snow storms" range from near-blizzards that don't quite shut everything down, to light flurries that don't live up to their forcast intensities. Blizzards are the Real Thing, with blinding snow and heavy winds that continue for days, not just hours. Then there's "Lake Effect", which can be combined with any of the first four, and refers to snow that falls downwind and uphill from any large unfrozen body of water when no "general" snowfall is occurring. There is no such thing as a "lake effect blizzard" though, despite the fact that it can satisfy every bit of the primary definition. Additional terms for the interested student to research: sleet, freezing rain, graupel and "diamond dust". There is an entire glossary of terms used by skiers for the state of snow on the ground, too. And yet another used by researchers and microphotographers dealing with the multitude of shapes taken on by individual snowflakes. Jim Deutch (JimboCat) -- "We live in an age where True Names give you power (where a True Name is one close enough to the correct spelling that Google knows what you mean.)" [David M. Palmer] > > 'The term "blizzard" is often tossed around when big winter storms > > blow in. But the National Weather service has an official definition [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Squalls are much heavier, but still intermittent, snow. I grew up in Maine, where we had an extensive snow vocabulary as well. "Squalls" there referred to wind. You can have squalls accompanied by snow, but that's not a necessary pairing--indeed, the term was probably more commonly used during rain storms than snow. > I grew up in Maine, where we had an extensive snow vocabulary as > well. "Squalls" there referred to wind. You can have squalls > accompanied by snow, but that's not a necessary pairing--indeed, the > term was probably more commonly used during rain storms than snow. There are squalls in the Gulf of Mexico. SignatureJohn Varela Trade NEWlamps for OLDlamps for email >> I grew up in Maine, where we had an extensive snow vocabulary as >> well. "Squalls" there referred to wind. You can have squalls >> accompanied by snow, but that's not a necessary pairing--indeed, the >> term was probably more commonly used during rain storms than snow. > >There are squalls in the Gulf of Mexico. As a northeast Ohioan, we were sometimes subjected to squall lines moving in off Lake Erie. According to http://www.erh.noaa.gov/er/box/glossary.htm "Squall- A strong wind characterized by a sudden onset in which the wind speed increases at least 16 knots and is sustained at 22 knots or more for at least one minute." But ... "Squall Line- Any non-frontal line or narrow band of active thunderstorms. The term is usually used to describe solid or broken lines of strong or severe thunderstorms." Signature************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * >> 'The term "blizzard" is often tossed around when big winter storms >> blow in. But the National Weather service has an official [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > yet another used by researchers and microphotographers dealing with > the multitude of shapes taken on by individual snowflakes. I sometimes find that "Lux flakes" best describes some diamond-shaped snow crystals. But those flakes are hardly "diamond dust"...or whatever. But, OK, graupel is good. (Snow pellets...little round snowballs.) >> We've had the second blizzard of an unusually mild winter (for us) and >> on Saturday I was rather annoyed to discover that someone had taken it [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > Do I have too narrow understanding of the word? Environment Canada says: Blizzards are severe winter storms characterized by the following: snow or blowing snow with winds of 40 km/hr or more, visibility reduced to less than one km. in snow and/or blowing snow, windchill of -25 or colder. All of the above conditions are expected to last for four hours or more to be officially classified as a blizzard. I think we had pretty well all of those - the winds, I believe, tripled the 40 kph speed on what they call 'exposed coastal areas'. I wouldn't call a snow squall a blizzard. Snow squalls are much shorter and less intense than blizzards. I'm not in the UK, and when we get a couple centimeters of snow, we call their fall rather dismissively 'just a flurry'. Our weather reporters like excitement, too, and while they don't call flurries blizzards, they do start tracking systems hundreds or even thousands of miles away, dwelling on what might happen here if the systems behave in certain ways. Most of the time, they either die down or veer away from us. And, of course, there are now several weather services who all seem to have different models in their computers which naturally produce quite different predictions of what is going to happen. SignatureCheryl > We've had the second blizzard of an unusually mild winter (for us) and > on Saturday I was rather annoyed to discover that someone had taken it [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > I suppose it is some consolation when considering climate change to know > that our local weather is not connected with the climate any more! Here in Greater Laurel, and possibly in other nearby areas, you will occasionally hear "Inkle-meant," primary access on "inkle" and secondary on "meant." I would like to attribute this to British recessive accent, but I think it's strictly local idiocy[1] that gets the credit. [1] Am I allowed to say "idiocy"? SignatureBob Lieblich Hoping for a higher tempacheer soon >Here in Greater Laurel, and possibly in other nearby areas, you will >occasionally hear "Inkle-meant," primary access on "inkle" and [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >[1] Am I allowed to say "idiocy"? Well, we sometimes pronounce it like that here, between ourselves, much as we exchange light banter about having been mizzled or needing a warmer duvitt. Are you sure that the denizens of Greater Laurel haven't embraced this form of restricted code? SignatureKaty Jennison spamtrap: remove the first two letters after the @ > >Here in Greater Laurel, and possibly in other nearby areas, you will > >occasionally hear "Inkle-meant," primary access on "inkle" and [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > a warmer duvitt. Are you sure that the denizens of Greater Laurel > haven't embraced this form of restricted code? Possible, but unlikely. I hear it mostly from the weather-nouncers on the telly. There's no indication that they're being facetious. SignatureBob Lieblich Still fondly remembering Charles Winchester's DES-picable |
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.