 |
 | 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 / British English / December 2003Parlor trick & Peanut butter and jelly
I come across two terms recently. First, parlor trick: It's very difficult to know the exact meaning of it since there is too many information online. Could anyone give my a lucid definition? Second, peanut butter and jelly. (sounds like a tongue twister) I wonder it is one thing called "peanut butter and jelly." Or two things called "peanut butter" and "jelly." Or three things called "peanut", "butter", and "jelly." I am serious. Please don't kid me. :P Thanks a lot. > I come across two terms recently. > > First, parlor trick: > It's very difficult to know the exact meaning of it since there is too many > information online. > Could anyone give my a lucid definition? A parlor (or parlour in British English) is an old-fashioned name for the lounge, sitting room, living room or whatever. A parlour trick would be some kind of conjouring trick suitable for performing to a small group of people in such a room. > Second, peanut butter and jelly. (sounds like a tongue twister) > I wonder it is one thing called "peanut butter and jelly." > Or two things called "peanut butter" and "jelly." > Or three things called "peanut", "butter", and "jelly." Peanut butter is a sandwich spread made from peanuts. Jelly in this context is what we British call jam, and is a fruit preserve also used as a sandwich spread. I believe it is popular in the US to put both into a sandwich at once, hence peanut butter and jelly sandwiches. Hope this helps! Tony  SignatureTony Mountifield Work: tony@softins.co.uk - http://www.softins.co.uk Play: tony@mountifield.org - http://tony.mountifield.org >Peanut butter is a sandwich spread made from peanuts. Jelly in this >context is what we British call jam, and is a fruit preserve also >used as a sandwich spread. I believe it is popular in the US to put >both into a sandwich at once, hence peanut butter and jelly sandwiches. "It must be jelly *cause jam don't shake like that" Jam(at least in the USA) is a fruit preserve with lots of sugar and fragments of fruit included. Jelly is usually a jelled syrup of clear fruit juice, although there are meat jellies also. Pectin is frequently added to make the liquid jell. Apples contain a good deal of pectin and apple juice may be sufficient to make any fruit jell. Uncooked pineapple has a reputation that it deters jelling. S& | >Peanut butter is a sandwich spread made from peanuts. Jelly in this | >context is what we British call jam, and is a fruit preserve also [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] | fruit jell. Uncooked pineapple has a reputation that it deters | jelling. Blackcurrent jelly (which we made last year) is a type of jam in the UK. Ingredients sugar, strained cooked fruit, perhaps with pectin. Jelly in the UK is a desert?sp? made gelatine with a fuit flavour and colour. Add boiling water to flavoured and coloured gelatine cubes, top up with cold water. Store in refrigerator till set. Dave F >| >Peanut butter is a sandwich spread made from peanuts. Jelly in this >| >context is what we British call jam, and is a fruit preserve also [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >colour. Add boiling water to flavoured and coloured gelatine cubes, top up >with cold water. Store in refrigerator till set. I may be out of date, but in the UK (and elsewhere) jellies certainly used to come in two types: 1. The dessert - made as you describe. 2. The preserve - which could be described as 'jam with the pulp and pips removed'. Google for "apple jelly" to see recipes. For example http://www.irelandseye.com/aarticles/culture/recipes/cooking/apple.shtm <quote> This well-flavoured jelly is very easy to make and will keep -if given a chance. It is delicious on hot, buttered scones or pancakes. The secret lies in the long, slow cooking which extracts the maximum amount of pectin -the setting agent-from the fruit. To ensure a clear, bright jelly it is vital to resist manfully the temptation to squeeze the pulp when straining the liquid. ... </quote> "Mrs Beeton" has several recipes for jelly - the preserve. SignaturePeter Duncanson UK (posting from u.c.l.e) | >| >Peanut butter is a sandwich spread made from peanuts. Jelly in this | >| >context is what we British call jam, and is a fruit preserve also [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] | 2. The preserve - which could be described as 'jam with the pulp and pips | removed'. Which I described: | >Blackcurrent jelly (which we made last year) is a type of jam in the UK. | >Ingredients sugar, strained cooked fruit, perhaps with pectin. Dave F >| >Jelly in the UK is a desert?sp? made gelatine with a fuit flavour and >| >colour. Add boiling water to flavoured and coloured gelatine cubes, top up [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >| >Blackcurrent jelly (which we made last year) is a type of jam in the UK. >| >Ingredients sugar, strained cooked fruit, perhaps with pectin. There is some crossover of the term jelly to two areas, but in general, in my experience in New York City (including Brooklyn, God help me!) the fruit flavored gelatine was always available as the commercial product "Jello" and was referred to by the commercial name. Although it might be acceptable (I still enjoyed it when I lived in NYC) its flavors were always rather chemical and inferior to unflavored gelatine combined with real fruit flavors. Jelly was always the clear fruit juice gelled with pectin to be used as a spread. Jello is not available in Finland and gelatine comes in clear dry sheets in small packages to be used to make gelled concoctions but Finns seem to prefer a kind of half gelled fruit product with the consistancy of snot, called kisseli (I'm not sure of the spelling as it is not in my dictionary) which slides down the throat agreeably and tastes OK S&. > There is some crossover of the term jelly to two areas, but in > general, in my experience in New York City (including Brooklyn, God [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > snot, called kisseli (I'm not sure of the spelling as it is not in my > dictionary) which slides down the throat agreeably and tastes OK That last thing you mention was popular also in Latvia (its name involves a soft "k", a long first "i", a single "s" where you have the double one, and an "s" on the end, otherwise it is very similar to what you wrote). It was translated to English as "thin jelly" in one of my small Latvian-English dictionaries. I'm familiar with the gelatin sheets also. SignatureSkitt (in Hayward, California) www.geocities.com/opus731/ >Which I described: >| >Blackcurrent jelly (which we made last year) is a type of jam in the UK. >| >Ingredients sugar, strained cooked fruit, perhaps with pectin. Sorry. I must read posts more carefully. I must read posts more carefully. I must read posts more carefully. I must read posts more carefully. I must read posts more carefully. I must read posts more carefully. I must read posts more carefully. SignaturePeter Duncanson UK (posting from u.c.l.e) > >Peanut butter is a sandwich spread made from peanuts. Jelly in this > >context is what we British call jam, and is a fruit preserve also [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Jam(at least in the USA) is a fruit preserve with lots of sugar and > fragments of fruit included. Ah right, that's the same as here in Britain. I was under the misapprelusion that that was what USAns called "jelly". Is jelly used much more commonly than jam in the US? Learn something every day (hopefully) - thanks! Cheers, Tony SignatureTony Mountifield Work: tony@softins.co.uk - http://www.softins.co.uk Play: tony@mountifield.org - http://tony.mountifield.org In our last episode, <brkltl$5pa$1@softins.clara.co.uk>, the lovely and talented Tony Mountifield broadcast on alt.usage.english: > Ah right, that's the same as here in Britain. I was under the > misapprelusion that that was what USAns called "jelly". Is jelly > used much more commonly than jam in the US? Yes, so it would appear from a survey at the grocery store. It is, I assume, a matter of expense. Grape and apple jelly are very inexpensive -- so much so that the packaging must represent a significant part of the price. Apparently there is a glut of grape and apple juice, for these are often the sweeting agents in other fruit juices, allowing the product to be advertised as 100% juice athough it isn't 100% the juice of the fruit depicted on the lable. Anything with any bit of actual fruit in it is generally at least twice the price. SignatureLars Eighner -finger for geek code- eighner@io.com http://www.io.com/~eighner/ If you can't be kind, at least be vague. --Miss Manners > > Jam(at least in the USA) is a fruit preserve with lots of sugar and > > fragments of fruit included. > > Ah right, that's the same as here in Britain. I was under the > misapprelusion that that was what USAns called "jelly". Is jelly > used much more commonly than jam in the US? In the Midwest (at least where and when I grew up), "jelly" covered pretty much all of the fruit preserves, although we might know that there was technically a difference between "jelly", "jam", and "preserves". Most of what was used on sandwiches would either have been (concord) grape jelly or strawberry jam, with blackberry or raspberry jam coming next. We would have called (and I still tend to call) all of these "jelly". There was also "mint jelly" (actually apple jelly with mint), the traditional accompaniment for lamb, and orange marmalade (used on toast at breakfast). SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |"Revolution" has many definitions. 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |From the looks of this, I'd say Palo Alto, CA 94304 |"going around in circles" comes |closest to applying... kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com | Richard M. Hartman (650)857-7572 http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ > > > Jam(at least in the USA) is a fruit preserve with lots of sugar and > > > fragments of fruit included. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > mint), the traditional accompaniment for lamb, and orange marmalade > (used on toast at breakfast). Kirsh's Shacauga usage seems pretty consistent with what I grew up with in New York. "Jelly" is the general term. "Jam" is sort of a special highfalutin pseudo-British variety of jelly, though it's so special that there's some tendency to think of it as a separate category. The core meaning of jelly, in the usual case (e.g., grape jelly) is preserves. In uk.culture.language.english Areff <rf243@sparky.cs.nyu.edu> wrote: > Kirsh's Shacauga usage seems pretty consistent with what I grew up > with in New York. "Jelly" is the general term. "Jam" is sort of a special > highfalutin pseudo-British variety of jelly, though it's so special > that there's some tendency to think of it as a separate category. The > core meaning of jelly, in the usual case (e.g., grape jelly) is > preserves. Other way round in Britain. When "jelly" is used to mean the spreadable substance rather than its more common use to mean the gelatine substance, it means a special high-falutin sort of jam that has been carefully sieved to remove seeds, bits of fruit skin etc. Matthew Huntbach >Other way round in Britain. When "jelly" is used to mean the spreadable >substance rather than its more common use to mean the gelatine substance, >it means a special high-falutin sort of jam that has been carefully sieved >to remove seeds, bits of fruit skin etc. It's not so much sieved as strained through a jelly-bag, so that the resulting gloop is completely clear. I wouldn't wonder but what there's a UK, and/or EU, standard which commercial producers need to comply with in order to be allowed to put Jelly on the label. SignatureKaty Jennison spamtrap: remove number to reply > In uk.culture.language.english Areff <rf243@sparky.cs.nyu.edu> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > it means a special high-falutin sort of jam that has been carefully sieved > to remove seeds, bits of fruit skin etc. Fascinating what counts as high-falutin in different places. "Jam" in the US means a special high-falutin sort of jelly that _hasn't_ had seeds, &c., removed. -Aaron J. Dinkin Dr. Whom > Fascinating what counts as high-falutin in different places. "Jam" in the > US means a special high-falutin sort of jelly that _hasn't_ had seeds, > &c., removed. Whereas in the UK, "jelly" (in one of its meanings) is a high-falutin' sort of jam that *has* had seeds etc removed. > -Aaron J. Dinkin > Dr. Whom > > Fascinating what counts as high-falutin in different places. "Jam" > > in the US means a special high-falutin sort of jelly that _hasn't_ > > had seeds, &c., removed. > Whereas in the UK, "jelly" (in one of its meanings) is a > high-falutin' sort of jam that *has* had seeds etc removed. Anyone else getting a sense of dejam vu? Signaturehttp://www.dacha.freeuk.com/yds/ The Yorkshire Dialect Society - information, publications and forthcoming events >>> Fascinating what counts as high-falutin in different places. "Jam" >>> in the US means a special high-falutin sort of jelly that _hasn't_ [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Anyone else getting a sense of dejam vu? Preserve us from conservatism. m. > >>> Fascinating what counts as high-falutin in different places. "Jam" > >>> in the US means a special high-falutin sort of jelly that _hasn't_ [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Preserve us from conservatism. That does not compote. >>>>> Fascinating what counts as high-falutin in different places. "Jam" >>>>> in the US means a special high-falutin sort of jelly that _hasn't_ [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > That does not compote. It's not a jam, it's a bottleneck. m. >Anyone else getting a sense of dejam vu? I'm getting something, but I can't make it out. Someone must be jamming the signal. > > I come across two terms recently. > > [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > Hope this helps! > Tony For the benefit of the original poster: The peanut butter and jelly sandwich is a favorite sandwich of American children, although adults will eat it too--I do, on occasion, although I eat peanut butter sandwiches without jelly more often. One American company makes a product in which peanut butter and jelly are packed together in the same jar: Smuckers Goober Grape peanut butter and grape jelly. SignatureRaymond S. Wise Minneapolis, Minnesota USA E-mail: mplsray @ yahoo . com | For the benefit of the original poster: The peanut butter and jelly sandwich | is a favorite sandwich of American children, although adults will eat it [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] | packed together in the same jar: Smuckers Goober Grape peanut butter and | grape jelly. <shudder> SignatureDave Fawthrop <dave@hyphenologist.co.uk> Born in Hull, Live in Halifax, ... Dave Fawthrop <hyphen@hyphenologist.co.uk> wrote in message ... > | For the benefit of the original poster: The peanut butter and jelly sandwich > | is a favorite sandwich of American children, although adults will eat it [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > <shudder> Is it the idea of peanut butter that repulses you? I've heard that British people, as a whole, don't take to it, which surprises me. I like it, but only when I have something to drink with it. ;-) I've even found out we don't even hold our eating utensils the same way when we eat. Americans hold their forks in the right hand to eat after they eat, while Britons keep the fork in their left after cutting the food. The more I learn, the less I know <g>. Something I did not know. I'm American BTW. Larry thelarry_g3@yahoo.com wrote: .... > Is it the idea of peanut butter that repulses you? I've heard that British > people, as a whole, don't take to it, which surprises me. I like it, but > only when I have something to drink with it. ;-) Right enough, peanut butter has never achieved the same popularity as here in the States. I was the exception here, having been introduced to it by another kid at around age nine or ten, and was so taken by the stuff, I began badgering my mother to get it for me. Not easy, as it was available then (circa 1950) only in obscure health food shops tucked away in back streets. The peanut butter here seems to me distinctly sweeter than the UK versions, and personally I prefer it. What I can't stomach is the idea of putting something else on it to make a sandwich: jelly (jam) or bananas or whatever. It may be the Americans view peanut butter as we in the UK do butter (the yellow variety) or margarine, on which it is perfectly OK to put cheese, jam, tomatoe, sausage or bacon to make a sandwich. > I've even found out we don't even hold our eating utensils the same way when > we eat. Americans hold their forks in the right hand to eat after they eat, > while Britons keep the fork in their left after cutting the food. The more > I learn, the less I know <g>. Something I did not know. I'm American BTW. > > Larry Again, I've got to be different! I've always held the fork in the right hand and knife in the left; no idea why though. SignatureIan Ft Worth, TX. change mocker to rocker to Reply by email On 15 Dec 2003, Ian wrote > I was the exception here, having been introduced to it by another > kid at around age nine or ten, and was so taken by the stuff, I > began badgering my mother to get it for me. Not easy, as it was > available then (circa 1950) only in obscure health food shops > tucked away in back streets. Ah, yes: the "natural product" school of filing foods. For the first couple of years after moving to the UK, I couldn't find popping corn -- one of my favourite snacks, which I have plain and salted. (I never liked butter, or caramel, or anything else on it.) I checked all the possible places in the supermarket: junk food shelves, nuts/crisps, pulses/dried peas -- nowhere to be found. Finally, I found it: it's sold in vegetarian and health-food stores, next to the organic split peas and mung beans. I was really chuffed to discover that my junk food of choice is vegetarian-approved -- indeed, it's *health-food*. (Microwave popcorn was a gooooood invention.) SignatureCheers, Harvey Ottawa/Toronto/Edmonton for 30 years; Southern England for the past 21 years. (for e-mail, change harvey to whhvs) > Again, I've got to be different! I've always held the fork in the > right hand and knife in the left; no idea why though. I take it you're not left-handed? Left-handers would do it that way, wouldn't they? >> Again, I've got to be different! I've always held the fork in the >> right hand and knife in the left; no idea why though. > >I take it you're not left-handed? Left-handers would do it that way, >wouldn't they? This (US) left-hander holds fork in left, knife in right. No switching after cutting. "Apex" <apext@xtra.co.nz> wrote... > > Again, I've got to be different! I've always held the fork in the > > right hand and knife in the left; no idea why though. > > I take it you're not left-handed? Left-handers would do it that way, > wouldn't they? I'm a left-handed Brit, and I use the right hand for the knife just like right-handers. I do have problems when given a fork and spoon for the dessert, though, because I naturally use the left hand for both. I tried using the fork in the right hand once, but unfortunately all the peach slices were right-hookers and I've never repeated the attempt. Matti >I'm a left-handed Brit, and I use the right hand for the knife just like >right-handers. I do have problems when given a fork and spoon for the >dessert, though, because I naturally use the left hand for both. I can say "me too" to all of that. > I >tried using the fork in the right hand once, but unfortunately all the >peach slices were right-hookers and I've never repeated the attempt. I get around the problem by using either the fork or the spoon but not both together. SignatureJohn Hall You can divide people into two categories: those who divide people into two categories and those who don't apext@xtra.co.nz wrote: > > Again, I've got to be different! I've always held the fork in the > > right hand and knife in the left; no idea why though. > > I take it you're not left-handed? Left-handers would do it that way, > wouldn't they? No - definitely dexterous in every respect! SignatureIan change mocker to rocker to Reply by email > What I can't stomach is the idea of putting something else on it to > make a sandwich: jelly (jam) or bananas or whatever. > It may be the Americans view peanut butter as we in the UK do butter > (the yellow variety) or margarine, on which it is perfectly OK to > put cheese, jam, tomatoe, sausage or bacon to make a sandwich. That's certainly not true of Americans in general, though I wouldn't rule out the possibility of it being a regional thing (I understand down South, like where Coop [Indiana] or Ray Wise [Egypt] come from, they eat things like peanut butter and bacon sandwiches). No, in GenAm culture, peanut butter has usages distinct from those of butter (or butter substitutes, for those sorry souls who use them). > > What I can't stomach is the idea of putting something else on it to > > make a sandwich: jelly (jam) or bananas or whatever. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > out the possibility of it being a regional thing (I understand down South, > like where Coop [Indiana] or Ray Wise [Egypt] come from, they eat things This is no way to make friends and influence people, R F. The members of alt.usage.english know by now that I am originally from Central Illinois, not Egypt (Southern Illinois). I'm pointing it out here for the benefit of those in uk.culture.language.english . For some reason, R F seems to consider it a real knee-slapper to claim I am from Egypt. No, I don't get what's so funny about it either. > like peanut butter and bacon sandwiches). No, in GenAm culture, peanut > butter has usages distinct from those of butter (or butter substitutes, > for those sorry souls who use them). SignatureRaymond S. Wise Minneapolis, Minnesota USA E-mail: mplsray @ yahoo . com >The members of alt.usage.english know by now that I am originally from >Central Illinois, not Egypt (Southern Illinois). I'm pointing it out here >for the benefit of those in uk.culture.language.english . For some reason, R >F seems to consider it a real knee-slapper to claim I am from Egypt. > >No, I don't get what's so funny about it either. It takes some time to get accustomed to RF's sense of humor. S& In uk.culture.language.english Larry G <thelarry_g3@yahoo.com> wrote: > Dave Fawthrop <hyphen@hyphenologist.co.uk> wrote in message ... >> | One American company makes a product in which peanut butter and jelly >> | are packed together in the same jar: Smuckers Goober Grape peanut butter and >> | grape jelly. >> <shudder> > Is it the idea of peanut butter that repulses you? I've heard that British > people, as a whole, don't take to it, which surprises me. I like it, but > only when I have something to drink with it. ;-) British people don't have anything particular against peanut butter, but it hasn't achieved the status of the stereotypical filling of sandwiches for children as it has in the USA, it's a filling people would be familiar with but wouldn't eat often or in quantity. What we do find exceedingly odd is the mixing of the savoury peanut butter with the sweet "jelly" (what we would call "jam"). It's even odder to find this weird combination so appreciatd that one company markets a ready made mix of it. And "Smuckers Goober Grape peanut butter grape jelly" sounds funny as well. Matthew Huntbach > What we do find exceedingly odd is the mixing of the savoury peanut > butter with the sweet "jelly" (what we would call "jam"). However, I have had friends in the past who were fond of cheese-and-jam sandwiches. Must admit I found that odd too. Cheers, Tony SignatureTony Mountifield Work: tony@softins.co.uk - http://www.softins.co.uk Play: tony@mountifield.org - http://tony.mountifield.org >> What we do find exceedingly odd is the mixing of the savoury peanut >> butter with the sweet "jelly" (what we would call "jam"). > >However, I have had friends in the past who were fond of cheese-and-jam >sandwiches. Must admit I found that odd too. Cheese-and-chutney is delicious, though the idea initially seemed strange to me. Best regards, Spehro Pefhany Signature"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward" speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com | >> What we do find exceedingly odd is the mixing of the savoury peanut | >> butter with the sweet "jelly" (what we would call "jam"). [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] | Cheese-and-chutney is delicious, though the idea initially seemed | strange to me. Traditionally at least in Northern England. Mince pies and Christmas cake are eaten with a hard cheese such as Wensleydale. Dave F >> What we do find exceedingly odd is the mixing of the savoury peanut >> butter with the sweet "jelly" (what we would call "jam"). > > However, I have had friends in the past who were fond of > cheese-and-jam sandwiches. Must admit I found that odd too. I think it probably depends on what type of cheese and what type of jam. I can imagine some combinations working rather well (a sharp cheddar with apple jelly, for example), and others being horrible. SignatureMike Stevens, narrowboat Felis Catus II Web site www.mike-stevens.co.uk No man is an island. So is Man. > I have had friends in the past who were fond of cheese-and-jam > sandwiches. In Massachusetts they make sandwiches of cream cheese and jelly. On sliced white bread. SignatureJohn Varela (Trade "OLD" lamps for "NEW" for email.) I apologize for munging the address but the spam is too much. > > I have had friends in the past who were fond of cheese-and-jam > > sandwiches. > > In Massachusetts they make sandwiches of cream cheese and jelly. On sliced > white bread. Not just in Massachusetts, Colonel: the "cream cheese and jelly sandwich" was an archaic, Depression-era sandwich formerly popular in New York (Largest City in America). Should be ProQuestable. > > > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > was an archaic, Depression-era sandwich formerly popular in New York > (Largest City in America). The great state of Massachusetts is the only place in which I have had the pleasure of encountering the succulent cream-cheese-and-jelly sandwich, Suh. And that was in the 1950s, long after the Depression. At the lunch counter in the Harvard Coop Technology Store, to be precise. I tried making one the other day and didn't particularly like it. SignatureJohn Varela (Trade "OLD" lamps for "NEW" for email.) I apologize for munging the address but the spam is too much. >The great state of Massachusetts is the only place in which I have had the >pleasure of encountering the succulent cream-cheese-and-jelly sandwich, Suh. >And that was in the 1950s, long after the Depression. At the lunch counter in >the Harvard Coop Technology Store, to be precise. > >I tried making one the other day and didn't particularly like it. SWMBO often orders bagels toasted with light cream cheese and jam. The gummy filling goes well with a chewy bagel. Best regards, Spehro Pefhany Signature"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward" speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com > >The great state of Massachusetts is the only place in which I have had > >the pleasure of encountering the succulent cream-cheese-and-jelly [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > SWMBO often orders bagels toasted with light cream cheese and jam. The > gummy filling goes well with a chewy bagel. It's especially good on a salt bagel. (I don't do "light" cream cheese, though.) SignatureSML ess el five six zero at columbia dot edu http://pirate-women.com > (I don't do "light" cream cheese, >though.) It is an abomination. Come to think of it, all 'light' and 'lite' foods and beverages are. SignatureCharles Riggs Email address: chriggs¦at¦eircom¦dot¦net >> I have had friends in the past who were fond of cheese-and-jam >> sandwiches. > >In Massachusetts they make sandwiches of cream cheese and jelly. On sliced >white bread. Cream cheese and jelly should be served on a graham cracker. Never bread. And, open-faced. Apple butter on cream cheese is very good. The exception is cream cheese and jelly on a bagel. Open-faced. > >> I have had friends in the past who were fond of cheese-and-jam > >> sandwiches. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > The exception is cream cheese and jelly on a bagel. Open-faced. Gee, I can't wait until Areff lands in this thread. I know of many people who top their toasted English muffins with cream cheese and jelly (or jam). Does anyone ever eat English muffins untoasted? >> >On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 16:06:33 UTC, tony@softins.clara.co.uk (Tony >Mountifield) [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > >Gee, I can't wait until Areff lands in this thread. The field is baited. Masterfully. In uk.culture.language.english Pat Durkin <durkinpa@nothome.com> wrote: > I know of many people who top their toasted English muffins with cream > cheese and jelly (or jam). Does anyone ever eat English muffins untoasted? English muffins are, of course, unknown in England. Or at least were until McDonalds introduced them. Matthew Huntbach | In uk.culture.language.english Pat Durkin <durkinpa@nothome.com> wrote: | [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] | English muffins are, of course, unknown in England. Or at least were | until McDonalds introduced them. Yes the Merkins invent something horrible and blame it on the English. They started with the language which is nothing like English and gets worse more different by the year. Then they blamed us for obsolete measures which we gave up decades ago. Now it is muffins. Can the Brits return the complement somehow? Dave F "Dave Fawthrop" <hyphen@hyphenologist.co.uk> wrote... > Yes the Merkins invent something horrible and blame it on the English. > They started with the language which is nothing like English and gets [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Can the Brits return the complement somehow? I'm planning to, as soon as I have a full compliment. Matti > "Dave Fawthrop" <hyphen@hyphenologist.co.uk> wrote... > > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > I'm planning to, as soon as I have a full compliment. How do you want your compliment? Fulsome? "Dave Fawthrop" wrote in message > Yes the Merkins invent something horrible and blame it on the English. > They started with the language which is nothing like English and gets worse > more different by the year. > Then they blamed us for obsolete measures which we gave up decades ago. > Now it is muffins. I could never understand why Merkins drive in miles but on the continental side of the road. -- Peg > "Dave Fawthrop" wrote in message > > Yes the Merkins invent something horrible and blame it on the English. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > -- > Peg Technology - in this case the ox train. In the beginning the North American colonies kept left, just like back home. When the ox train was introduced a problem arose. When two ox trains met on a narrow road (just about all) the drivers had to pull their teams to the side. Oxen have tough mouths. Since most people are right-handed the right hand is stronger the drivers tended to pull to the right. Over time the other traffic tended to follow the ox trains, and the colonists eventually took to riding and driving on the right. Why do the English keep left, and the French keep right? Because of knights. The French knights were heavily armored, and carried heavy shields on the left arm. When two knights unknown to each other met they passed to the right, holding up their shields. English knights carried quite small shields, and a sword on the right. They tended to pass with opposing sword arms. The peasants followed suite. There is an enormous amount of misinformation on the web. One common furphy is to blame driving on the right on Napoleon. While it is true that Napoleon imposed this on conguered countries it was merely a continuation of French practice, dating back to the days of chivalry. One source which is roughly correct is at: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/infrastructure/right.htm However, this site does not give enough importance to the role of the ox team. Regards, Izzy > > I could never understand why Merkins drive in miles but on the continental > > side of the road. > > -- > > Peg > > > Technology - in this case the ox train. <snip urban legends> A somewhat more authoritative explanation: http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a3_021b.html SignatureJohn Varela (Trade "OLD" lamps for "NEW" for email.) I apologize for munging the address but the spam is too much. >>>I could never understand why Merkins drive in miles but on the continental >>>side of the road. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a3_021b.html I wish you had given a snippet, so that I could decide whether I wanted to open this link or not. SignatureRob Bannister > >>>I could never understand why Merkins drive in miles but on the continental > >>>side of the road. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > I wish you had given a snippet, so that I could decide whether I wanted > to open this link or not. Don't worry about it. The page is hardly authoriative. The left-right practices derived from the age of chivalry, not wagons. Regards, Izzy > Yes the Merkins invent something horrible and blame it on the English. > They started with the language which is nothing like English and gets worse > more different by the year. > Then they blamed us for obsolete measures which we gave up decades ago. > Now it is muffins. Yeah, well, you can't blame us for marmite. SignatureJohn Varela (Trade "OLD" lamps for "NEW" for email.) I apologize for munging the address but the spam is too much. > | In uk.culture.language.english Pat Durkin <durkinpa@nothome.com> wrote: > | [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Yes the Merkins invent something horrible and blame it on the English. I beg your pardon, Sir. English muffins, or sourdough muffins are the breakfast treat my wife and I look forward on visits to the United Steaks! If they are not english, tough for you. Toasted, with salted butter they sure can match our butter croissants dunkend in milk coffee. Or how about pancakes, smeared with butter and swimming in genuine maple sirup? You don't need lunch most of the time after that. > They started with the language which is nothing like English and gets worse > more different by the year. > Then they blamed us for obsolete measures which we gave up decades ago. When you renamed "Scotland Yard" to "Scotland Meter"? ;-) > Now it is muffins. > > Can the Brits return the complement somehow? They did, when they exported their cars to America. ;-) Thomas F. Howald | When you renamed "Scotland Yard" to "Scotland Meter"? ;-) The Merkins also use the other meaning of yard. Dave F >| When you renamed "Scotland Yard" to "Scotland Meter"? ;-) > >The Merkins also use the other meaning of yard. We, if you are referring to Americans, also know how to spell. SignatureCharles Riggs Email address: chriggs¦at¦eircom¦dot¦net > >| When you renamed "Scotland Yard" to "Scotland Meter"? ;-) > > > >The Merkins also use the other meaning of yard. > We, if you are referring to Americans, also know how to spell. Yes, we get Charmed and Buffy on our TVs. Signaturehttp://www.dacha.freeuk.com/free/ Free Software: Hermetic Font - Crosses, Dice, Greek, Hebrew, Music, Stars, Zodiac | >| When you renamed "Scotland Yard" to "Scotland Meter"? ;-) | > | >The Merkins also use the other meaning of yard. | | We, if you are referring to Americans, also know how to spell. Just tweaking the Tiger's tail :-) What's that Abrams tank doing in my garden? Aaaaaaaaaah........................... <usenet connection lost> >| >| When you renamed "Scotland Yard" to "Scotland Meter"? ;-) >| > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >Just tweaking the Tiger's tail :-) That tail has been so tweaked of late, there is only a stub left. >What's that Abrams tank doing in my garden? I don't know, but you Europeans (1) weren't complaining about Sherman tanks in your garden some sixty years back. Ah, but memories are short. 1. Yes, the UK is part of Europe no matter what those dirty conservatives have to say. SignatureCharles Riggs Email address: chriggs¦at¦eircom¦dot¦net > I don't know, but you Europeans (1) weren't complaining about Sherman > tanks in your garden some sixty years back. Except, possibly, when they said that what was wrong with the US troops was that they were "overpaid, oversexed and over here". :-) SignatureMike Stevens, narrowboat Felis Catus II Web site www.mike-stevens.co.uk No man is an island. So is Man. >> I don't know, but you Europeans (1) weren't complaining about Sherman >> tanks in your garden some sixty years back. > >Except, possibly, when they said that what was wrong with the US troops >was that they were "overpaid, oversexed and over here". :-) Rampant jealousy, then and now, but who will blame you? We have outlandishly large dicks too, as you must be aware. SignatureCharles Riggs Email address: chriggs¦at¦eircom¦dot¦net > >> I don't know, but you Europeans (1) weren't complaining about > >> Sherman tanks in your garden some sixty years back. > > > >Except, possibly, when they said that what was wrong with the US > >troops was that they were "overpaid, oversexed and over here". :-) > Rampant jealousy, then and now, but who will blame you? We have > outlandishly large dicks too, as you must be aware. ITYM "are". Signaturehttp://www.dacha.freeuk.com/free/ Free Software: Mah-Jong Tiles & Playing Cards >>>> I don't know, but you Europeans (1) weren't complaining about >>>> Sherman tanks in your garden some sixty years back. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > ITYM "are". I'm not aware of it. Or did you means "are... dicks"? SignatureSimon R. Hughes >>>I don't know, but you Europeans (1) weren't complaining about Sherman >>>tanks in your garden some sixty years back. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Rampant jealousy, then and now, but who will blame you? We have > outlandishly large dicks too, as you must be aware. Only our womenfolk were aware of things like that. Those were not gay times. SignatureRob Bannister > > Rampant jealousy, then and now, but who will blame you? We have > > outlandishly large dicks too, as you must be aware. > > > Only our womenfolk were aware of things like that. Those were not gay > times. For many, they were; a lot of the womenfolk had not a few gay moments by the sound of it. Signaturehttp://www.dacha.freeuk.com/penny/1d-01.htm To make up for the lack of one eye, one ear, one leg and half a tail, the cat carried an extraordinary number of fleas. >> I don't know, but you Europeans (1) weren't complaining about Sherman >> tanks in your garden some sixty years back. > >Except, possibly, when they said that what was wrong with the US troops >was that they were "overpaid, oversexed and over here". :-) The last time I searched for the origin of that phrase it appeared to have originated in Australia. Anyway, a number of British women did not use the words as a complaint. ;-) SignaturePeter Duncanson UK (posting from u.c.l.e) >>| >| When you renamed "Scotland Yard" to "Scotland Meter"? ;-) >>| > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > I don't know, but you Europeans (1) weren't complaining about Sherman > tanks in your garden some sixty years back. You never heard 'overpaid, oversexed and over here'? SignatureRob Bannister ... >> They started with the language which is nothing like English and gets worse >> more different by the year. >> Then they blamed us for obsolete measures which we gave up decades ago. > >When you renamed "Scotland Yard" to "Scotland Meter"? ;-) Please - that's "Scotland Metre". "Scotland Meter" is where they house the capital's traffic wardens. Cheers - Ian On 16 Dec 2003, Thomas F. Howald wrote -snip- > Or how about pancakes, smeared with butter and swimming in genuine > maple sirup? "Sirup"? (Or perhaps "sirop"?) A question aimed at Canadian contributors: When I lived in Canada, would I have possibly written "sirup/sirop" instead of "syrup"? (I honestly can't recall what I used. I *think* it was "syrup", but whatever the case, both "sirup" and "sirop" look truly, fundamentally weird to me.) SignatureCheers, Harvey Ottawa/Toronto/Edmonton for 30 years; Southern England for the past 21 years. (for e-mail, change harvey to whhvs) > On 16 Dec 2003, Thomas F. Howald wrote > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > whatever the case, both "sirup" and "sirop" look truly, fundamentally > weird to me.) To me, as well, but the US government seems to go both ways. In the Code of Federal Regulations, 21 CFR 168 is entitled "Sweeteners and Table Sirups", and has subsections entitled "Glucose sirup", "Dried glucose sirup", "Cane sirup", "Maple sirup", "Sorghum sirup", and "Table sirup". In the other hand, the same title has 21 CFR 184 has subsections entitled "Malt syrup", "Corn syrup", and "High fructose corn syrup". There don't appear to be any mentions for "sirop". SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |Society in every state is a blessing, 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |but government, even in its best Palo Alto, CA 94304 |state is but a necessary evil; in its |worst state, an intolerable one. kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com | Thomas Paine (650)857-7572 http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ > | English muffins are, of course, unknown in England. Or at least > | were until McDonalds introduced them. > > Yes the Merkins invent something horrible and blame it on the English. By spreading the horrible lie that Samuel Bath Thomas was from Plymouth, England and that he used his mother's recipe? SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |Ye knowe ek, that in forme of speche 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 | is chaunge Palo Alto, CA 94304 |Withinne a thousand yer, and wordes | tho kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com |That hadden prys now wonder nyce and (650)857-7572 | straunge |Us thenketh hem, and yet they spake http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ | hem so | Chaucer >Yes the Merkins invent something horrible and blame it on the English. >They started with the language which is nothing like English and gets worse >more different by the year. Thank you for writing a couple of sentences as they ought to be written. We Americans will all be grateful for your example. Can you write some more for us, please? I still don't have the knack for the language you so obviously do. SignatureCharles Riggs Email address: chriggs¦at¦eircom¦dot¦net > English muffins are, of course, unknown in England. Or at least were > until McDonalds introduced them. "Do you know the muffin man, the muffin man, the muffin man; Do you know the muffin man, who comes from down your way?" [Mid-Victorian nursery rhyme] Definitely predates McDonalds. Both muffins AND crumpets (aka pikelets) have "always" been around in England. Both are toasted before eating. The essential difference between the two is that the muffin is "enclosed", whereas the crumpet has one very porous surface. and one that isn't. The type of muffin that I preceive of as being a totally Merkin invention is the rather gooey blueberry or chocolate "bun". SignatureBrian {Hamilton Kelly} bhk@dsl.co.uk "We can no longer stand apart from Europe if we would. Yet we are untrained to mix with our neighbours, or even talk to them". George Macaulay Trevelyan, 1919 >>English muffins are, of course, unknown in England. Or at least were >>until McDonalds introduced them. > > "Do you know the muffin man, the muffin man, the muffin man; > Do you know the muffin man, who comes from down your way?" > [Mid-Victorian nursery rhyme] Not quite, it's the muffin man "who lives in Drury Lane." Not that I am mid-Victorian. (For those who might care, I am now afflicted with a nasty bout of STS, coupled with a lingering image of Wilfred Pickles.) > Definitely predates McDonalds. > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > The type of muffin that I preceive of as being a totally Merkin invention > is the rather gooey blueberry or chocolate "bun". I wonder which is the most repeatedly discussed food topic in aue? My guess would be the classification of muffins. Or, perhaps, of sandwiches. SignatureLaura (emulate St. George for email) > I wonder which is the most repeatedly discussed food topic in aue? My > guess would be the classification of muffins. Or, perhaps, of sandwiches. Or hot dogs. SignatureJohn Varela (Trade "OLD" lamps for "NEW" for email.) I apologize for munging the address but the spam is too much. > >>English muffins are, of course, unknown in England. Or at least were > >>until McDonalds introduced them. [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > I wonder which is the most repeatedly discussed food topic in aue? My > guess would be the classification of muffins. Or, perhaps, of sandwiches. You inspired me to go looking for an item I had copied out of the local paper last Thanksgiving. From the (Minneapolis) *Star Tribune,* Thursday, November 27, 2003: [quote] COUNTER INTELLIGENCE Diets boost steakhouse business by Jeremy Iggers Star Tribune Staff Writer [...] [Figlio's] new Atkins sandwich is a top seller--it's simply Figlio's hamburger without the bun, served with a side of scrambled eggs and two thick pieces of bacon. "It's a heart attack on a plate," quipped [Figlio's owner, Phil] Roberts. [end quote] SignatureRaymond S. Wise Minneapolis, Minnesota USA E-mail: mplsray @ yahoo . com > Both muffins AND crumpets (aka pikelets) have "always" been around in > England. Both are toasted before eating. The essential difference > between the two is that the muffin is "enclosed", whereas the crumpet > has one very porous surface. and one that isn't. Pikelets are not crumpets. They're thinner, usually of greater diameter, and crispier. Signaturehttp://www.dacha.freeuk.com/colour/0x-0.htm Black Magic Right Ear of Ninib Right Foot in Hell "Brian {Hamilton Kelly}" <bhk@dsl.co.uk> wrote... > > English muffins are, of course, unknown in England. Or at least were > > until McDonalds introduced them. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Definitely predates McDonalds. Matthew was commenting on *the label* "English muffins", not the items themselves. He could have made it clearer, though! Matti In uk.culture.language.english Brian {Hamilton Kelly} <bhk@dsl.co.uk> wrote: >> English muffins are, of course, unknown in England. Or at least were >> until McDonalds introduced them. > "Do you know the muffin man, the muffin man, the muffin man; > Do you know the muffin man, who comes from down your way?" > [Mid-Victorian nursery rhyme] > Definitely predates McDonalds. Yes, but is what is called a "muffin" here what is now called an "English muffin"? > Both muffins AND crumpets (aka pikelets) have "always" been around in > England. Both are toasted before eating. The essential difference [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > The type of muffin that I preceive of as being a totally Merkin invention > is the rather gooey blueberry or chocolate "bun". Yes, perhaps the Americans need to use the phrase "English muffin" to mean a bread-like thing that needs toasting because they have taken to using plain "muffin" to mean a cake. However, what McDonalds call an "English muffin" isn't the same thing as what was called in England just a "muffin" before we were McDonaldsised. The McDonalds version has large irregular air holes in, and has a rather chewy texture, while a plain muffin has a very smooth and rather dense texture. Matthew Huntbach > Yes, perhaps the Americans need to use the phrase "English muffin" to mean > a bread-like thing that needs toasting because they have taken to using [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > air holes in, and has a rather chewy texture, while a plain muffin has > a very smooth and rather dense texture. You can't blame McDonald's for this one (except, perhaps, for exporting the name to England). They were called "English muffins" in America long before McDonald's started using them. The English baker (Samuel Thomas) who first started making and selling them in New York in 1880 marketed them as "English muffins", and the Americans believed him. I don't know if he did so simply because the word "crumpet" was unknown in America (and so he chose what seemed the closest American equivalent) or whether, in the absence of the food, the word had, perhaps, acquired some slang meaning that he wanted to avoid. SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |Voting in the House of 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |Representatives is done by means of a Palo Alto, CA 94304 |little plastic card with a magnetic |strip on the back--like a VISA card, kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com |but with no, that is, absolutely (650)857-7572 |*no*, spending limit. | P.J. O'Rourke http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ > Yes, perhaps the Americans need to use the phrase "English muffin" to mean > a bread-like thing that needs toasting because they have taken to using > plain "muffin" to mean a cake. Those were my thoughts, too. > However, what McDonalds call an "English > muffin" isn't the same thing as what was called in England just a "muffin" > before we were McDonaldsised. The McDonalds version has large irregular > air holes in, and has a rather chewy texture, while a plain muffin has > a very smooth and rather dense texture. Not having suffered the McDonald's version, I hadn't realized the difference. A muffin, IME, is as you describe it, and NOT the McD's ersatz. SignatureBrian {Hamilton Kelly} bhk@dsl.co.uk "We can no longer stand apart from Europe if we would. Yet we are untrained to mix with our neighbours, or even talk to them". George Macaulay Trevelyan, 1919 > > >On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 16:06:33 UTC, tony@softins.clara.co.uk (Tony > Mountifield) [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Gee, I can't wait until Areff lands in this thread. I've never liked the cream-cheese-and-jelly combination, whatever sort of thing it is put on. (I do like cheesecake, however, provided it is Brooklyn cheesecake and not, say, bogus Chicago cheesecake.) For a long time I didn't like cream cheese as a spread at all, but I grew to like it on bagels -- but not with jelly. > > > >On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 16:06:33 UTC, tony@softins.clara.co.uk (Tony > > Mountifield) [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > For a long time I didn't like cream cheese as a spread at all, but I > grew to like it on bagels -- but not with jelly. I like those little Lenders bagels, but usually just chew on them plain. Cream cheese is something I lace with onions or garlic, and spread on soda crackers (saltines). When I am starved for something different in the way of munchies, I combine liver sausage with cream cheese, pepper the hell out of it, and spread that on crackers. Oh, by the way... I grew up thinking of the afternoon snack as bread-and-jam, and always considered "jelly" as an upper class, lifted pinky, hoity-toity way of saying jam. (Actually, Mom and both grandma's had so much cooking to do that throwing out peelings, pulp,etc, and straining was not only a waste of food, but a huge waste of time, as well. Consequently, no jelly. > Oh, by the way... I grew up thinking of the afternoon snack as > bread-and-jam, and always considered "jelly" as an upper class, lifted > pinky, hoity-toity way of saying jam. Fascinating. I've always regarded "jam" as a posh way of saying 'jelly'. This may be a nifty example of a phenomenon I can't remember the name for: a term becomes a high-prestige term in one area (e.g., America) because it is used commonly in another area that the people of the former regard as inherently posh (e.g., England), even though in the latter it is regarded as the lower-class form. -Aaron J. Dinkin Dr. Whom > > Oh, by the way... I grew up thinking of the afternoon snack as > > bread-and-jam, and always considered "jelly" as an upper class, > > lifted pinky, hoity-toity way of saying jam. > Fascinating. I've always regarded "jam" as a posh way of saying > 'jelly'. > This may be a nifty example of a phenomenon I can't remember the name > for: a term becomes a high-prestige term in one area (e.g., America) > because it is used commonly in another area that the people of the > former regard as inherently posh (e.g., England), even though in the > latter it is regarded as the lower-class form. Oh, I assure you, the term "jam" is not a "lower-class form". Even the Royal Family refer to jam as "jam" and would be quite amused to hear it called "jelly". Signaturehttp://www.dacha.freeuk.com/aureole/40-map.htm Wakefield (recent map) >>> Oh, by the way... I grew up thinking of the afternoon snack as >>> bread-and-jam, and always considered "jelly" as an upper class, [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Royal Family refer to jam as "jam" and would be quite amused to hear > it called "jelly". "All fruit." SignatureSkitt (in Hayward, California) www.geocities.com/opus731/ > > > Oh, by the way... I grew up thinking of the afternoon snack as > > > bread-and-jam, and always considered "jelly" as an upper class, [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Royal Family refer to jam as "jam" and would be quite amused to hear it > called "jelly". Except for the Queen Bee. SignatureDavid ==== SW France >>>Oh, by the way... I grew up thinking of the afternoon snack as >>>bread-and-jam, and always considered "jelly" as an upper class, [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Royal Family refer to jam as "jam" and would be quite amused to hear it > called "jelly". Have you been to tea with them? I wouldn't be at all surprised if they called it 'preserves'. SignatureRob Bannister > I know of many people who top their toasted English muffins with cream > cheese and jelly (or jam). Does anyone ever eat English muffins untoasted? Certainly not: their only fit application is in Eggs Benedict. SignatureBrian {Hamilton Kelly} bhk@dsl.co.uk "We can no longer stand apart from Europe if we would. Yet we are untrained to mix with our neighbours, or even talk to them". George Macaulay Trevelyan, 1919 In uk.culture.language.english John Varela <OLDlamps@earthlink.net> wrote: >> I have had friends in the past who were fond of cheese-and-jam >> sandwiches. > In Massachusetts they make sandwiches of cream cheese and jelly. On sliced > white bread. This I have come across in England. If the cream cheese is very creamy, it isn't that far from the English cream tea (substitute the white bread for a scone, of course). Matthew Huntbach > > What we do find exceedingly odd is the mixing of the savoury peanut > > butter with the sweet "jelly" (what we would call "jam"). [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Cheers, > Tony Have you tried cheese and chutney? Good stuff. Izzy > Have you tried cheese and chutney? > > Good stuff. Oh yes indeed; of late, I've found Geeta's Premium Mango Chutney excellent in this role. (Mind you, I'm not averse to a Cream Cracker with a piece of _really_ tangy Cheddar and a dollop of lime pickle: the sort that blows the top of your head off:-) SignatureBrian {Hamilton Kelly} bhk@dsl.co.uk "We can no longer stand apart from Europe if we would. Yet we are untrained to mix with our neighbours, or even talk to them". George Macaulay Trevelyan, 1919 >What we do find exceedingly odd is the mixing of the savoury peanut >butter with the sweet "jelly" (what we would call "jam"). It's even >odder to find this weird combination so appreciatd that one company >markets a ready made mix of it. And "Smuckers Goober Grape peanut >butter grape jelly" sounds funny as well. The mix of savory and sweet is not at all that unusual. Ham is frequently served with sugary pineapple and many far eastern dishes combine chicken or pork with sweetened fruit and spices. I have made a stuffing for roast turkey with cashew nuts, noodles, eggs, almonds, celery, parsley, mushrooms, and fried bits of bacon and it worked out quite well. S& >> What we do find exceedingly odd is the mixing of the savoury peanut >> butter with the sweet "jelly" (what we would call "jam"). It's even [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > celery, parsley, mushrooms, and fried bits of bacon and it worked out > quite well. Every Christmas, I make a stuffing for the turkey out of mixed nuts, oranges, lemons, mushrooms and various herbs, all bound together with egg. It's delicious. SignatureMike Stevens, narrowboat Felis Catus II Web site www.mike-stevens.co.uk No man is an island. So is Man. In uk.culture.language.english on 15 Dec 2003 15:35:08 GMT, Matthew Huntbach <mmh@dcs.qmw.ac.uk> wrote: }British people don't have anything particular against peanut butter, }but it hasn't achieved the status of the stereotypical filling of }sandwiches for children as it has in the USA, it's a filling people }would be familiar with but wouldn't eat often or in quantity. My kids loved it, and the crunchy one, and now they are legally adults they still eat it when they come home. }What we do find exceedingly odd is the mixing of the savoury peanut }butter with the sweet "jelly" (what we would call "jam"). It's even }odder to find this weird combination so appreciatd that one company }markets a ready made mix of it. And "Smuckers Goober Grape peanut }butter grape jelly" sounds funny as well. Not all that odd, when my wife was pregnant I used to have to make banana & Marmite sandwiches. Euuuuchhh. {R} }Matthew Huntbach > Not all that odd, when my wife was pregnant I used to have to make > banana & Marmite sandwiches. Peanut butter and fried banana sandwiches were a favorite of Elvis Presley. http://www.abc.net.au/widebay/stories/s593764.htm SignatureJohn Varela (Trade "OLD" lamps for "NEW" for email.) I apologize for munging the address but the spam is too much. On 15 Dec 2003, John Varela wrote >> Not all that odd, when my wife was pregnant I used to have to >> make banana & Marmite sandwiches. > > Peanut butter and fried banana sandwiches were a favorite of Elvis > Presley. Peanut butter and (unfried) banana sandwiches are very common -- or at least they were when I lived in Canada. For what it's worth, my mother worked with a woman who took peanut butter and onion sandwiches for lunch. (Turnabout is fair play, though: they considered her fondness for chip butties -- a sandwich filled with french fries, for them what doesn't know -- deeply alien.) SignatureCheers, Harvey Ottawa/Toronto/Edmonton for 30 years; Southern England for the past 21 years. (for e-mail, change harvey to whhvs) >(Turnabout is fair play, >though: they considered her fondness for chip butties -- a sandwich >filled with french fries, for them what doesn't know -- deeply alien.) Chips as we understand them in Britain are not the same as french fries, IMO. Chips usually have a larger cross-section, and are not fried to such a crispness that they can't be bent. SignatureJohn Hall "If you haven't got anything nice to say about anybody, come sit next to me." Alice Roosevelt Longworth (1884-1980) >> (Turnabout is fair play, though: they considered her fondness >> for chip butties -- a sandwich filled with french fries, for [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > fries, IMO. Chips usually have a larger cross-section, and are not > fried to such a crispness that they can't be bent. Properly prepared french fries are bendable. The overdone ones are not. SignatureSkitt (in Hayward, California) www.geocities.com/opus731/ On 15 Dec 2003, John Hall wrote >> (Turnabout is fair play, >> though: they considered her fondness for chip butties -- a >> sandwich filled with french fries, for them what doesn't know -- >> deeply alien.) > Chips as we understand them in Britain are not the same as french > fries, IMO. Chips usually have a larger cross-section, and are not > fried to such a crispness that they can't be bent. I'm aware of that distinction; I was trying to translate for them what doesn't know without getting all technical-like. For what it's worth, though, I'd say there are now three rather than two types of "chip-like potato products": french fries as you describe them; traditional chips; and things that are chip-shaped but are oven-baked. The best chips are home-made ones. (Hands-down winners, every time.) SignatureCheers, Harvey Ottawa/Toronto/Edmonton for 30 years; Southern England for the past 21 years. (for e-mail, change harvey to whhvs) > British people don't have anything particular against peanut butter, > but it hasn't achieved the status of the stereotypical filling of [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > markets a ready made mix of it. And "Smuckers Goober Grape peanut > butter grape jelly" sounds funny as well. I would not consider peanut butter to be what you call "savoury". It can be, and usually is, quite sweet. That quality of it also justifies making the jelly-mixed product. SignatureSkitt (in Hayward, California) www.geocities.com/opus731/ > In uk.culture.language.english Larry G <thelarry_g3@yahoo.com> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > What we do find exceedingly odd is the mixing of the savoury peanut > butter with the sweet "jelly" (what we would call "jam"). Although I com from the esatern side of the Pond I actually like peanut butter and jam on bread. I've even been known to put salt on certain types of peanut butter. I prefer the crunchy peanut butter to the smooth. I developed a taste for this in boarding school. There was a guy from the States sharing our table and he often brounght peanut butter to the breakfast table - at that time you couldn't get peanut butter in Ireland. He ate it with jam (or jelly) and he shared his peanut butter with us. I liked it and still do. Regaqrds, Einde O'Callaghan follow up to ucle > British people don't have anything particular against peanut butter, > but it hasn't achieved the status of the stereotypical filling of > sandwiches for children as it has in the USA, it's a filling people > would be familiar with but wouldn't eat often or in quantity. I have heard that a taste for peanut butter, as well as for root beer and marmite, is something most easily acquired in childhood. SignatureJohn Varela (Trade "OLD" lamps for "NEW" for email.) I apologize for munging the address but the spam is too much. > I have heard that a taste for peanut butter, as well as for root beer > and marmite, is something most easily acquired in childhood. Root beer and marmite?? -- no, thanks! I'll take my root beer straight up, if you don't mind. SignatureRoland Hutchinson Will play viola da gamba for food. NB mail to my.spamtrap [at] verizon.net is heavily filtered to remove spam. If your message looks like spam I may not see it. | > I have heard that a taste for peanut butter, as well as for root beer | > and marmite, is something most easily acquired in childhood. | | Root beer and marmite?? -- no, thanks! I'll take my root beer straight | up, if you don't mind. Kindly do not mention Root beer on uk.culture.language.english. Vomit ruins keyboards. Dave F > In uk.culture.language.english Larry G <thelarry_g3@yahoo.com> wrote: > > Dave Fawthrop <hyphen@hyphenologist.co.uk> wrote in message ... [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > Matthew Huntbach You also have a problem with that great American breakfast, waffles with maple syrup and sausages. Why? Izzy > You also have a problem with that great American breakfast, waffles with > maple syrup and sausages. Shirley, that is only a development of the great Dutch breakfast of pancakes with crispy bacon and blackstrap molasses? I believe they've been eating this since long before the founding of Nieuw Amsterdam. BTW, are you really named after Megalexandros? SignatureBrian {Hamilton Kelly} bhk@dsl.co.uk "We can no longer stand apart from Europe if we would. Yet we are untrained to mix with our neighbours, or even talk to them". George Macaulay Trevelyan, 1919 > > You also have a problem with that great American breakfast, waffles with > > maple syrup and sausages. > > Shirley, that is only a development of the great Dutch breakfast of > pancakes with crispy bacon and blackstrap molasses? I believe they've > been eating this since long before the founding of Nieuw Amsterdam. I don't know how you could prove that, but I know the Dutch sure as heck aren't having breakfasts like that now. The "pannenkoeken" restaurants open at noon, if you're lucky. They're not intended for breakfast. I was in Amsterdam the other morning at 9.30 and the only place that would even serve me coffee (besides the US burger chains) was a US-style bagel shop. And the Dutch notion of bacon is nothing like crisp, it's practically raw and terribly salty. I guess calling the dark "stroop" "blackstrap molasses" is not terribly far off the mark. SignatureGive me good American breakfasts -- Donna Richoux > In uk.culture.language.english Larry G <thelarry_g3@yahoo.com> wrote: > > Dave Fawthrop <hyphen@hyphenologist.co.uk> wrote in message ... [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > What we do find exceedingly odd is the mixing of the savoury peanut > butter with the sweet "jelly" (what we would call "jam"). It's even I take it you've never had mock apple pie made with RITZ(R) crackers or pizza made with chunks of pineapple! > odder to find this weird combination so appreciatd that one company > markets a ready made mix of it. And "Smuckers Goober Grape peanut > butter grape jelly" sounds funny as well. What I wrote was "Smuckers Goober Grape peanut butter and grape jelly," which I copied off of a Web site. However, the product's label identifies it as "Smucker's(R) Goober(R) Grape Peanut Butter & Grape Jelly Stripes." See a picture of the product at http://www2u.biglobe.ne.jp/~yrn/super/sp02.jpg "Smucker's(R) Goober(R)" is the trademarked product name, "Grape" the flavor (it's also available in strawberry) and "Peanut Butter & Grape Jelly Stripes" the description. As has been explained before in alt.usage.english , a product which does not include a description on the label risks the name becoming generic, as happened with "Cellophane." As for "Smucker's," there used to be a television advertising campaign in which people said of the jams and jellies, "With a name like Smucker's, it has to be good.(R)" (Yes, it's a trademark.) The comedy program Saturday Night Live did a parody of this commercial, in which various unappetizing words were substituted for "Smucker's," the point being, of course, that "Smucker's" itself doesn't sound all that appetizing when you stop to think about it. (And you, being unfamiliar with the product name to begin with, might have seen the name as being unappetizing right away.) SignatureRaymond S. Wise Minneapolis, Minnesota USA E-mail: mplsray @ yahoo . com mmh@dcs.qmw.ac.uk spake thus: > British people don't have anything particular against peanut butter, > but it hasn't achieved the status of the stereotypical filling of [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > markets a ready made mix of it. And "Smuckers Goober Grape peanut > butter grape jelly" sounds funny as well. US peanut butter is heavily laced with sugar, which makes this somewhat less strange. I've discoursed here at great length on the US obsession with peanut butter before, so I won't say much, other than the fact that I hated peanut butter until I discovered the unsweetened variety. SignatureDavid ===== > US peanut butter is heavily laced with sugar, which makes this > somewhat less strange. That's standard postwar processed peanut butter you're talking about. But there's also the rise of Post-IHC "natural peanut butter", which is the only kind I can consume now. Natural peanut butter's ingredients are just peanuts and, preferably, salt. Once I started eating natural peanut butter, I found the other kind excessively and horribly sweet. > I've discoursed here at great length on the US obsession with peanut > butter before, so I won't say much, other than the fact that I hated > peanut butter until I discovered the unsweetened variety. Now that's what I'm talkin' 'bout. >> US peanut butter is heavily laced with sugar, which makes this >> somewhat less strange. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Now that's what I'm talkin' 'bout. My first exposure to peanut butter was in a DP camp in Germany. It came in rectangular five-gallon cans and, I think, it was packaged for the military. I immediately loved it, but then, food wasn't all that plentiful in general, so I loved all kinds of stuff -- powdered slit-pea soup (The Green Horror) included. The peanut butter, as I remember it, was what is now labeled as the "old-fashioned" type. I still like that kind. My wife uses tons of peanut butter to prepare kare-kare -- a Filipino dish that I don't particularly care for. That dish is a staple when there is a large Filipino gathering to be fed. SignatureSkitt (in Hayward, California) www.geocities.com/opus731/ skitt99@comcast.net spake thus: > >> US peanut butter is heavily laced with sugar, which makes this > >> somewhat less strange. [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > included. The peanut butter, as I remember it, was what is now labeled as > the "old-fashioned" type. I still like that kind. The peanut butter at the summer camp where I worked was "army surplus" and came in oil drums. I wonder if it was the same stuff? SignatureDavid ===== >My first exposure to peanut butter was in a DP camp in Germany. It came in >rectangular five-gallon cans and, I think, it was packaged for the military. >I immediately loved it, but then, food wasn't all that plentiful in general, >so I loved all kinds of stuff -- powdered slit-pea soup (The Green Horror) >included. The peanut butter, as I remember it, was what is now labeled as >the "old-fashioned" type. I still like that kind. I apologize if this seems picky but it is "split pea". Perhaps it was a typo. S& >> My first exposure to peanut butter was in a DP camp in Germany. It >> came in rectangular five-gallon cans and, I think, it was packaged [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > I apologize if this seems picky but it is "split pea". Perhaps it was > a typo. Typo, of course. I do a lot of those. I catch the majority as I go, but I don't re-read my posts before sending, so that's why sh.t happens. I also don't use a spelling checker, not that it would have helped in this instance. SignatureSkitt (in Hayward, California) www.geocities.com/opus731/ >>> My first exposure to peanut butter was in a DP camp in Germany. It >>> came in rectangular five-gallon cans and, I think, it was packaged [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >don't use a spelling checker, not that it would have helped in this >instance. You must notice I have the same problem. But I posted because "slit pea" sounds almost right and is not illogical. Incidentally I make a terrific split pea soup adding butter, fried onions, chopped parsely, chopped celery stalks and leaves, boullion, and sometimes boiled slices of potato. I try to stay away from meat for emotional reasons but crisp bits of bacon or fried diced ham is great in the soup. And of course, cumin seeds and salt to taste but be careful. Bouillon is salty and too much salt is a real problem in cooking. Boilled white rice could substitute for the potatoes. It freezes well. S& In uk.culture.language.english Skitt <skitt99@comcast.net> wrote: > My wife uses tons of peanut butter to prepare kare-kare -- a Filipino dish > that I don't particularly care for. That dish is a staple when there is a > large Filipino gathering to be fed. Is this similar to the "groundnut soup" that West Africans make? That also involves quantities of peanut butter added to a sort of stew. Matthew Huntbach >> My wife uses tons of peanut butter to prepare kare-kare -- a >> Filipino dish that I don't particularly care for. That dish is a [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > That also involves quantities of peanut butter added to a sort of > stew. I guess. See a kare-kare recipe at: http://www.duyan.com/recipes/beef/karekare2.shtml Caution: The bagoong (shrimp paste) mentioned at the end is nasty stuff. My wife loves it, but it always gives her a tummy ache. Just smelling it makes me sick. SignatureSkitt (in Hayward, California) www.geocities.com/opus731/ In uk.culture.language.english Skitt <skitt99@comcast.net> wrote: >>> My wife uses tons of peanut butter to prepare kare-kare -- a >>> Filipino dish that I don't particularly care for. That dish is a >>> staple when there is a large Filipino gathering to be fed. >> Is this similar to the "groundnut soup" that West Africans make? >> That also involves quantities of peanut butter added to a sort of >> stew. > I guess. See a kare-kare recipe at: > http://www.duyan.com/recipes/beef/karekare2.shtml > > Caution: The bagoong (shrimp paste) mentioned at the end is nasty stuff. > My wife loves it, but it always gives her a tummy ache. Just smelling it > makes me sick. A google on "groundnut soup" reveals quite a few recipes from Ghana, Nigeria etc, and they do seem similar to your kare-kare. Some of the google groundnut soup recipes seem a bit wimpish - an authentic African taste probably would include tripe and other odd bits like your kare-kare, Africans also seem to find fish and meat together in a stew fine in a way Europeans mostly don't. Matthew Huntbach In uk.culture.language.english Areff <rf243@sparky.cs.nyu.edu> wrote: >> US peanut butter is heavily laced with sugar, which makes this >> somewhat less strange. > That's standard postwar processed peanut butter you're talking about. > But there's also the rise of Post-IHC "natural peanut butter", which is > the only kind I can consume now. Natural peanut butter's ingredients > are just peanuts and, preferably, salt. Perhaps that's the problem solved then. I'm not aware of "peanut butter" in the UK ever being anything but what you refer to as "natural peanut butter". Matthew Huntbach > > US peanut butter is heavily laced with sugar, which makes this > > somewhat less strange. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > the only kind I can consume now. Natural peanut butter's ingredients > are just peanuts and, preferably, salt. A friend of mine prefers natural peanut butter, but doesn't care for salt, so she buys the kind of natural peanut butter with no added salt which is kept refrigerated in the dairy section of the store. SignatureRaymond S. Wise Minneapolis, Minnesota USA E-mail: mplsray @ yahoo . com > > > US peanut butter is heavily laced with sugar, which makes this > > > somewhat less strange. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > so she buys the kind of natural peanut butter with no added salt which is > kept refrigerated in the dairy section of the store. I've also seen unsalted natural peanut butter in jars on the non-refrigerated shelves. | Dave Fawthrop <hyphen@hyphenologist.co.uk> wrote in message ... | > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] | | Is it the idea of peanut butter that repulses you? No! peanut butter is more or less edible. Peanut butter and jam is bad. peanut butter and grape jam in one jar sounds IMO revolting. One should never be surprised by foreigners. Dave F >| Dave Fawthrop <hyphen@hyphenologist.co.uk> wrote in message ... >| > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >Peanut butter and jam is bad. >peanut butter and grape jam in one jar sounds IMO revolting. It's co-extruded into the jar so that the two are not mixed, so it's not as bad as you might think. >One should never be surprised by foreigners. http://www.cybercandy.co.uk/aaasmt/index.php/url_indprod?xlc=735 One review on the above page mentions an inferior English copy of the Smucker's product. Is aerosol cheese sold anywhere outside the USofA? Best regards, Spehro Pefhany Signature"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward" speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com >>| Dave Fawthrop <hyphen@hyphenologist.co.uk> wrote in message ... >>| > [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] >One review on the above page mentions an inferior English copy of the >Smucker's product. Is aerosol cheese sold anywhere outside the USofA? AEROSOL CHEESE? I beg your pardon. Aerosol cheese? Mike SignatureM.J.Powell >>One review on the above page mentions an inferior English copy of the >>Smucker's product. Is aerosol cheese sold anywhere outside the USofA? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Aerosol cheese? There is a chemical concoction that has a cheese-like appearance that is sold in an aerosol can. It is made to be used to spray cheese on small crackers. It's called Cheese Whiz or something like that. It's fun to take a can of it when scuba diving or snorkeling. Spray some in the water and it attracts hordes of small fish. Makes for good underwater pictures. I was told, though, that the "cheese" is harmful to fish and I don't do it any more. It's only right since a fish shouldn't be expected to eat something I wouldn't eat. Except a worm, of course. > >>One review on the above page mentions an inferior English copy of the > >>Smucker's product. Is aerosol cheese sold anywhere outside the USofA? [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > do it any more. It's only right since a fish shouldn't be expected to > eat something I wouldn't eat. Except a worm, of course. Does anyone know what brand of pour-on/spray-on cheese is used in the fastfood shops such as MickeyD's, BK, etc? I don't htink it is truly sliced, ICBW (obRF). It definitely has the Velveeta texture and flavor. I have never knowingly eaten anything with CheezWhiz on it, but imagine it can't be far from the (pre-?)melted cheese on my quarter-pounder with cheese. As a child, my very favorite food was the Velveeta grilled cheese sandwich. Nowadays I can only handle Velveeta (also a product called American Cheese) if it is properly diced and served as part of a peas-'n-cheese salad, loaded with onions and mayo. > It definitely has the Velveeta texture and flavor. I have never knowingly > eaten anything with CheezWhiz on it, but imagine it can't be far from the > (pre-?)melted cheese on my quarter-pounder with cheese. According to a recent article in some newspaper, probably the Food section of The Washington Post, it was stated that the only real, true, authentic, and correct way to make a Philly Cheese Steak, as done in the finest restaurants in Philadelphia, is with CheezWhiz. SignatureJohn Varela (Trade "OLD" lamps for "NEW" for email.) I apologize for munging the address but the spam is too much. > > It definitely has the Velveeta texture and flavor. I have never knowingly > > eaten anything with CheezWhiz on it, but imagine it can't be far from the [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > correct way to make a Philly Cheese Steak, as done in the finest restaurants > in Philadelphia, is with CheezWhiz. I wonder. Does Kraft (or whoever the manufacturer of CheezWhiz is) make otherly flavored squeeze cheeses? I mean, Swiss, cream cheese, port salut? I assume Velveeta (and/ or CheezWhiz) is a takeoff on cheddars. >As a child, my very favorite food was the Velveeta grilled cheese sandwich. Particularly good if the sandwich is cooked in a waffle iron. The little squares add something to it. >>>> Dave Fawthrop <hyphen@hyphenologist.co.uk> wrote in message ... >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >> One review on the above page mentions an inferior English copy of the >> Smucker's product. Yeah, but did you see her spelling? And she's AOL. m. > >One review on the above page mentions an inferior English copy of the > >Smucker's product. Is aerosol cheese sold anywhere outside the USofA? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Aerosol cheese? Cue the Swedish pharmacist joke... SignatureBrian {Hamilton Kelly} bhk@dsl.co.uk "We can no longer stand apart from Europe if we would. Yet we are untrained to mix with our neighbours, or even talk to them". George Macaulay Trevelyan, 1919 speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat spake thus: > >One should never be surprised by foreigners. > > http://www.cybercandy.co.uk/aaasmt/index.php/url_indprod?xlc=735 > > One review on the above page mentions an inferior English copy of the > Smucker's product. Is aerosol cheese sold anywhere outside the USofA? Ah, squirty cheese. A delight of my American teenage summers - midnight feasts of Ritz crackers and squirty cheese. I think it came out of the can in with a cross-sectional star shape. No, I've never seen it anywhere else. SignatureDavid ===== >speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat spake thus: > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >midnight feasts of Ritz crackers and squirty cheese. I think it came >out of the can in with a cross-sectional star shape. It does. It is a favourite, of course, among food sex aficionados: less messy than whipped cream and more satisfying, some say. SignatureCharles Riggs Email address: chriggs¦at¦eircom¦dot¦net > No! peanut butter is more or less edible. > Peanut butter and jam is bad. > peanut butter and grape jam in one jar sounds IMO revolting. > > One should never be surprised by foreigners. Yeah, remember, you guys eat Marmite. In the US, they patch roofs with the stuff. >Dave Fawthrop <hyphen@hyphenologist.co.uk> wrote in message ... >> [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >people, as a whole, don't take to it, which surprises me. I like it, but >only when I have something to drink with it. ;-) The thought of peanut butter and jelly often repulses the Brits. But, it also makes them feel peckish and desirous of a serving of jellied eels. | >Dave Fawthrop <hyphen@hyphenologist.co.uk> wrote in message ... | >> [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] | it also makes them feel peckish and desirous of a serving of jellied | eels. That is a London/Southern dish, not appreciated by all. Dave F >Is it the idea of peanut butter that repulses you? I've heard that British >people, as a whole, don't take to it, which surprises me. I like it, but >only when I have something to drink with it. ;-) What do you get when you cross peanut butter with a rooster? Best regards, Spehro Pefhany Signature"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward" speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com >What do you get when you cross peanut butter with a rooster? A crucified rooster? S& | >Is it the idea of peanut butter that repulses you? I've heard that British | >people, as a whole, don't take to it, which surprises me. I like it, but | >only when I have something to drink with it. ;-) | | What do you get when you cross peanut butter with a rooster? A nut roast? Dave F "Dave Fawthrop" <hyphen@hyphenologist.co.uk> wrote... > <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote: > | > | What do you get when you cross peanut butter with a rooster? > > A nut roast? It's probably a cock that sticks to the roof of your mouth, but I wouldn't know about such things. Matti >>> Is it the idea of peanut butter that repulses you? I've heard that >>> British people, as a whole, don't take to it, which surprises me. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > A nut roast? Footprints in your sandwich? SignatureMike Stevens, narrowboat Felis Catus II Web site www.mike-stevens.co.uk No man is an island. So is Man. > >Is it the idea of peanut butter that repulses you? I've heard that British > >people, as a whole, don't take to it, which surprises me. I like it, but > >only when I have something to drink with it. ;-) > > What do you get when you cross peanut butter with a rooster? A cock with nuts? > I've even found out we don't even hold our eating utensils the same > way when we eat. Americans hold their forks in the right hand to eat > after they eat, while Britons keep the fork in their left after > cutting the food. The more I learn, the less I know <g>. Something > I did not know. I'm American BTW. I can tell you that it's real fun to be raised with metric measuring and being a left-hand-fork user and then move to an English-measure and right-hand-fork-using country. SignatureSkitt (in Hayward, California) www.geocities.com/opus731/ | I can tell you that it's real fun to be raised with metric measuring and | being a left-hand-fork user and then move to an English-measure and ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ | right-hand-fork-using country. Hmmmm. The English use metric and left hand fork. SignatureConfused >> I can tell you that it's real fun to be raised with metric measuring >> and being a left-hand-fork user and then move to an English-measure [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Hmmmm. > The English use metric and left hand fork. Mmm, yeah. I'm at a loss as to what to call the yards and inches and such as a mesuring system. It used to be the English system. What is it now? SignatureSkitt (in Hayward, California) www.geocities.com/opus731/ | >> I can tell you that it's real fun to be raised with metric measuring | >> and being a left-hand-fork user and then move to an English-measure [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] | Mmm, yeah. I'm at a loss as to what to call the yards and inches and such | as a mesuring system. It used to be the English system. What is it now? Merkin measure? Dave F > Mmm, yeah. I'm at a loss as to what to call the yards and inches and such > as a mesuring system. It used to be the English system. What is it now? I've always known it as "Imperial" measurement, presumably because it was mainly used in the former British Empire. Strange that the widest use of it appears now to be in the first (?) country to secede from that Empire... (correct me if I'm wrong) Cheers, Tony SignatureTony Mountifield Work: tony@softins.co.uk - http://www.softins.co.uk Play: tony@mountifield.org - http://tony.mountifield.org | > Mmm, yeah. I'm at a loss as to what to call the yards and inches and such | > as a mesuring system. It used to be the English system. What is it now? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] | appears now to be in the first (?) country to secede from that Empire... | (correct me if I'm wrong) But the British Empire is long gone. Dave F > | > Mmm, yeah. I'm at a loss as to what to call the yards and inches and such > | > as a mesuring system. It used to be the English system. What is it now? [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > But the British Empire is long gone. Which is why I said "former".... Tony SignatureTony Mountifield Work: tony@softins.co.uk - http://www.softins.co.uk Play: tony@mountifield.org - http://tony.mountifield.org In alt.usage.english, Skitt wrote: >I'm at a loss as to what to call the yards and inches and such >as a mesuring system. It used to be the English system. Imperial measure? Fits nicely. SignatureMike Barnes Cheshire, England >> I'm at a loss as to what to call the yards and inches and such >> as a mesuring system. It used to be the English system. > > Imperial measure? > > Fits nicely. Not too well -- there's some spillage. One Imperial gallon is 1.2 gallons in the system I'm talking about. Very poor fit. SignatureSkitt (in Hayward, California) www.geocities.com/opus731/ In alt.usage.english, Skitt wrote: >>> I'm at a loss as to what to call the yards and inches and such >>> as a mesuring system. It used to be the English system. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >Not too well -- there's some spillage. One Imperial gallon is 1.2 gallons >in the system I'm talking about. Very poor fit. Ah, I'd forgotten about that. But was what you call the "gallon" in what you call "the English system" *ever* an English gallon? To answer your original question, "the American system" is the best I can do. Boring, I know. SignatureMike Barnes Cheshire, England I just came across this message from Mike Barnes <december2003@mikebarnes.fsnet.co.uk>, which has been sitting on alt.usage.english since Tue, 16 Dec 2003 08:21:04 +0000. >In alt.usage.english, Skitt wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >Ah, I'd forgotten about that. But was what you call the "gallon" in what >you call "the English system" *ever* an English gallon? Well, yes. Some time back, in answer to a question of mine, someone in this group was kind enough to inform us all that at about the time of the Revolution (ours, of course) there were several sizes of gallon available. I've forgotten the details -- no doubt they can be Googled -- but the U.S. gallon descends from the gallon used to measure wine [1] (as I recall), while the Imperial gallon descends from a different gallon. [1] Having chosen the wine gallon, we now measure our wine in liters (or sometimes litres). Go figger. Regards, John SignatureJohn Estill Millersburg, Ohio USA > >> I'm at a loss as to what to call the yards and inches and such > >> as a mesuring system. It used to be the English system. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Not too well -- there's some spillage. One Imperial gallon is 1.2 gallons > in the system I'm talking about. Very poor fit. Do you mean 1.25? A gallon is 8 pints in both UK and US, and a British or Imperial pint is 20 fl oz. I believe a US pint is 16 fl oz instead. Are there any other identically-named units of measurement that differ in size between the UK and the US? Cheers, Tony SignatureTony Mountifield Work: tony@softins.co.uk - http://www.softins.co.uk Play: tony@mountifield.org - http://tony.mountifield.org >> >> I'm at a loss as to what to call the yards and inches and such >> >> as a mesuring system. It used to be the English system. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >Are there any other identically-named units of measurement that differ >in size between the UK and the US? A "snoot-full" and a "skin-full". We're a little larger on average. >>>> I'm at a loss as to what to call the yards and inches and such >>>> as a mesuring system. It used to be the English system. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Do you mean 1.25? My conversion program says that 1.20095 is the right number. > A gallon is 8 pints in both UK and US, and a British or Imperial pint > is 20 fl oz. I believe a US pint is 16 fl oz instead. > > Are there any other identically-named units of measurement that differ > in size between the UK and the US? I don't know about other units, but the ounces are different, and that's what is messing you up. One of our (US) ounces makes 1.040842 UK ounces. SignatureSkitt (in Hayward, California) www.geocities.com/opus731/ > >> Not too well -- there's some spillage. One Imperial gallon is 1.2 > >> gallons in the system I'm talking about. Very poor fit. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > I don't know about other units, but the ounces are different, and that's > what is messing you up. One of our (US) ounces makes 1.040842 UK ounces. Well there you go. And 1.25 / 1.040842 gives 1.20095 - that explains it. I didn't know ounces were different too. Cheers, Tony SignatureTony Mountifield Work: tony@softins.co.uk - http://www.softins.co.uk Play: tony@mountifield.org - http://tony.mountifield.org > I don't know about other units, but the ounces are different, and > that's what is messing you up. One of our (US) ounces makes 1.040842 > UK ounces. Are you talking about the ounce as a unit of weight (1/16 of a UK pound) or of the fluid ounce (sometimes mis-called "ounce") as a measure of volume (1/20 of a UK pint). SignatureMike Stevens, narrowboat Felis Catus II Web site www.mike-stevens.co.uk No man is an island. So is Man. >> I don't know about other units, but the ounces are different, and >> that's what is messing you up. One of our (US) ounces makes 1.040842 [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > pound) or of the fluid ounce (sometimes mis-called "ounce") as a > measure of volume (1/20 of a UK pint). We were discussing fluids. Gallons were mentioned in the post I was answering, but you snipped that one, apparently without reading it, and thus you got confused. SignatureSkitt (in Hayward, California) www.geocities.com/opus731/ > >> I don't know about other units, but the ounces are different, and > >> that's what is messing you up. One of our (US) ounces makes [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > pound) or of the fluid ounce (sometimes mis-called "ounce") as a > > measure of volume (1/20 of a UK pint). > We were discussing fluids. Gallons were mentioned in the post I was > answering, but you snipped that one, apparently without reading it, > and thus you got confused. Ounces is weight; volume is fluid ounces. Whatever has previously been discussed, failure to use the correct terms is liable to result in some confusion. Signaturehttp://www.dacha.freeuk.com/zodiac/7lib-0.htm Libra (September 24th - October 23rd) Images, Associations, Qualities, Careers, Health >>> I don't know about other units, but the ounces are different, and >>> that's what is messing you up. One of our (US) ounces makes [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > answering, but you snipped that one, apparently without reading it, > and thus you got confused. No, I noticed it. I just object quite strongly to the inherent confusion involved in referring to a fluid ounce as an ounce. SignatureMike Stevens, narrowboat Felis Catus II Web site www.mike-stevens.co.uk No man is an island. So is Man. > A gallon is 8 pints in both UK and US, and a British or Imperial > pint is 20 fl oz. I believe a US pint is 16 fl oz instead. > > Are there any other identically-named units of measurement that > differ in size between the UK and the US? The brain. SignatureOpus the Penguin (that's my real email addy) You snipped my sig! >> A gallon is 8 pints in both UK and US, and a British or Imperial >> pint is 20 fl oz. I believe a US pint is 16 fl oz instead. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > The brain. The foundational "fluid ounce" itself apparently has varying capacities, being about 29.6 ml in the US, and about 28.4 ml in the UK. http://cgi.peak.org/~jeremy/retort.cgi?American=fluid%20ounce http://cgi.peak.org/~jeremy/retort.cgi?British=fluid%20ounce Since "teaspoon", "tablespoon", and "cup" may be derived from fluid ounces, these presumably vary as well. SignatureJack Gavin >>> A gallon is 8 pints in both UK and US, and a British or Imperial >>> pint is 20 fl oz. I believe a US pint is 16 fl oz instead. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Since "teaspoon", "tablespoon", and "cup" may be derived from fluid > ounces, these presumably vary as well. Especially as the US tablespoon is the equivalent of the UK dessertspoon. m. >Are there any other identically-named units of measurement that differ >in size between the UK and the US? The US BCH, a unit of measurement used by machinists the world over, differs slightly from the UK BCH, due to the different gene pools in our two populations. SignatureCharles Riggs Email address: chriggs¦at¦eircom¦dot¦net >> Are there any other identically-named units of measurement that >> differ in size between the UK and the US? > > The US BCH, a unit of measurement used by machinists the world over, > differs slightly from the UK BCH, due to the different gene pools in > our two populations. I thought those units were RCHs. They are more encountered more rarely, though. SignatureSkitt (in Hayward, California) www.geocities.com/opus731/ >>> Are there any other identically-named units of measurement that >>> differ in size between the UK and the US? [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > I thought those units were RCHs. They are more encountered more > rarely, though. Good grief! I really must read what I write before hitting "send". SignatureSkitt (in Hayward, California) www.geocities.com/opus731/ In alt.usage.english, Skitt wrote: >>> Are there any other identically-named units of measurement that >>> differ in size between the UK and the US? [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >I thought those units were RCHs. They are more encountered more rarely, >though. I thought they were FCHs. Weird. SignatureMike Barnes Cheshire, England >In alt.usage.english, Skitt wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > >I thought they were FCHs. Weird. RCH is the standard around these parts. A local machinist has taken samples and proposes to set the conversion factor at 1 RCH = 0.0025". My feeling is that more research is needed. Best regards, Spehro Pefhany Signature"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward" speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com Spehro Pefhany infrared: >>In alt.usage.english, Skitt wrote: >>> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >samples and proposes to set the conversion factor at 1 RCH = 0.0025". >My feeling is that more research is needed. At last it clicks. For a few minutes there I thought you were all talking about the MSH. SignaturePeter Moylan Peter.Moylan@newcastle.edu.au http://eepjm.newcastle.edu.au (OS/2 and eCS information and software) > Spehro Pefhany infrared: >> [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > At last it clicks. For a few minutes there I thought you were all > talking about the MSH. As far as I'm concerned, you're all tallking about WTF. SignatureMike Stevens, narrowboat Felis Catus II Web site www.mike-stevens.co.uk No man is an island. So is Man. >>In alt.usage.english, Skitt wrote: >>> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >samples and proposes to set the conversion factor at 1 RCH = 0.0025". >My feeling is that more research is needed. My very point, Spehro. We need to look into the variation between the RCHs and BCHs of one country compared with those in others. It could be a lengthy study. SignatureCharles Riggs Email address: chriggs¦at¦eircom¦dot¦net >>> Are there any other identically-named units of measurement that >>> differ in size between the UK and the US? [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >I thought those units were RCHs. They are more encountered more rarely, >though. The scale, as I learned it when working with machinists, runs: BCH, RCH, BCH from thinnest to thickest. The first B stands for blonde, of course, and the second for black. I started to write RCH yesterday, Skitt, but liking the ambiguity of BCH, I used it instead. SignatureCharles Riggs Email address: chriggs¦at¦eircom¦dot¦net In alt.usage.english, Charles Riggs wrote: >The scale, as I learned it when working with machinists, runs: BCH, >RCH, BCH from thinnest to thickest. The first B stands for blonde, of >course, and the second for black. The machinists I worked with were obviously less sophisticated: only F for "fine". SignatureMike Barnes Cheshire, England > >> I can tell you that it's real fun to be raised with metric measuring > >> and being a left-hand-fork user and then move to an English-measure [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Mmm, yeah. I'm at a loss as to what to call the yards and inches and such > as a mesuring system. It used to be the English system. What is it now? It's called the US Customary System. SignatureRaymond S. Wise Minneapolis, Minnesota USA E-mail: mplsray @ yahoo . com >> I'm at a loss as to what to call the yards and inches >> and such as a mesuring system. It used to be the English system. >> What is it now? > > It's called the US Customary System. Thanks, Raymond. SignatureSkitt (in Hayward, California) www.geocities.com/opus731/ >> >> I can tell you that it's real fun to be raised with metric measuring >> >> and being a left-hand-fork user and then move to an English-measure [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > >It's called the US Customary System. By whom? SignatureCharles Riggs Email address: chriggs¦at¦eircom¦dot¦net > >"Skitt" <skitt99@comcast.net> wrote in message > >> Mmm, yeah. I'm at a loss as to what to call the yards and inches [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > By whom? By the US FDA, at least: Food labels printed must show the net contents in both metric (grams, kilograms, milliliters, liters) and U.S. Customary System (ounces, pounds, fluid ounces) terms. 21 CFR 101.105 SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |Those who study history are doomed 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |to watch others repeat it. Palo Alto, CA 94304 kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com (650)857-7572 http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ | > >"Skitt" <skitt99@comcast.net> wrote in message | > >> Mmm, yeah. I'm at a loss as to what to call the yards and inches [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] | | 21 CFR 101.105 I note that metric is given *first*. So how long do you think it will take before the US goes metric, it took several decades for the UK to metricate. Dave F > So how long do you think it will take before the US goes metric, it > took several decades for the UK to metricate. Correction - it's taken several decades so far for the UK to partly-metricate. SignatureMike Stevens, narrowboat Felis Catus II Web site www.mike-stevens.co.uk No man is an island. So is Man. On Thu, 18 Dec 2003, in alt.usage.english, Mike Stevens <mike.fc2@which.net> writes Mike - I don't know if it is deliberate, but your sig separator is broken - the space after the "--" isn't a plain space. SignatureMark Browne If replying by email, please use the "Reply-To" address, as the "From" address will be rejected > On Thu, 18 Dec 2003, in alt.usage.english, Mike Stevens > <mike.fc2@which.net> writes > > Mike - I don't know if it is deliberate, but your sig separator is > broken - the space after the "--" isn't a plain space. It's not deliberate and I do know about it. The strange symbol you get is the effect of QuoteFix trying to fix the well-known bug in OE and not getting it quite right (for me, although it seems to do the trick for other users. Ho, hum). SignatureMike Stevens, narrowboat Felis Catus II Web site www.mike-stevens.co.uk No man is an island. So is Man. >> Mike Stevens writes >> Mike - I don't know if it is deliberate, but your sig separator is >> broken - the space after the "--" isn't a plain space. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > and not getting it quite right (for me, although it seems to do the > trick for other users. Ho, hum). Actually, it is the result of your using Western European (Windows) encoding for all your previous messages. This latest message of yours is in Western European (ISO) encoding, and its sig separator worked just fine for QuoteFix. SignatureSkitt (in Hayward, California) www.geocities.com/opus731/ >>> Mike Stevens writes > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > yours is in Western European (ISO) encoding, and its sig separator > worked just fine for QuoteFix. That's interesting. I've not changed any settings on my software, so why should one message have been in a different encoding (whatever one of those is!)? Does OE when replying pick up the encoding from the message replied to? I'd actually quite like to get rid of the bug, so if anyone can suggest a quick and easy way of doing so I'd be grateful. Those of you who wish to reply advising me to get rid of all my present software and start again, please don't bother, as I shan't take any notice. SignatureMike Stevens, narrowboat Felis Catus II Web site www.mike-stevens.co.uk No man is an island. So is Man. >>>> Mike Stevens writes >>>> Mike - I don't know if it is deliberate, but your sig separator is >>>> broken - the space after the "--" isn't a plain space. [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > present software and start again, please don't bother, as I shan't > take any notice. You appear to have fixed it. This message of yours was using the proper character set (iso-8859-1) instead of the Windows (Windows-1252) set. Make sure that the "Tools/Options/Send/Reply to messages using the format in which they were sent" box is not checked. Select the "Western European (ISO)" option for the "International Settings". That should work. SignatureSkitt (in Hayward, California) www.geocities.com/opus731/ >>>>> Mike Stevens writes > [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] >sure that the "Tools/Options/Send/Reply to messages using the format in >which they were sent" box is not checked. No he hasn't; he's just found a way to convince OE that it's been fixed. Agent (and, presumably, other newsreaders) still show the spurious character. Whatever it is, it isn't a space, and not even those newsreaders which allow for OE's idiosyncrasies by accepting dash dash CR will accept dash dash something-else. SignatureDon Aitken Mail to the addresses given in the headers is no longer being read. To mail me, substitute "clara.co.uk" for "freeuk.com". >>>>>> Mike Stevens writes >> [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] >those newsreaders which allow for OE's idiosyncrasies by accepting >dash dash CR will accept dash dash something-else. The character is hex 80 (binary 10000000). Hex 80 is unassigned in iso-8859-1. SignaturePeter Duncanson UK (posting from u.c.l.e) >>>>> Mike Stevens writes > [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > (Windows-1252) set. Make sure that the "Tools/Options/Send/Reply to > messages using the format in which they were sent" box is not checked. It was, and as far as I know, has been for a very long time. > Select the "Western European (ISO)" option for the "International > Settings". That should work. Right, I've done that now. Now let's see if it works. Thanks for the advice. What's at the bottom of this message looks better already. -- Mike Stevens, narrowboat Felis Catus II Web site www.mike-stevens.co.uk No man is an island. So is Man. >> Select the "Western European (ISO)" option for the "International >> Settings". That should work. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Thanks for the advice. What's at the bottom of this message looks > better already. Yup, it looks good. SignatureSkitt (in Hayward, California) www.geocities.com/opus731/ >>> Select the "Western European (ISO)" option for the "International >>> Settings". That should work. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >Yup, it looks good. Here, too. SignatureDon Aitken Mail to the addresses given in the headers is no longer being read. To mail me, substitute "clara.co.uk" for "freeuk.com". > >>> Select the "Western European (ISO)" option for the "International > >>> Settings". That should work. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Here, too. However, it's not a valid .sig-separator, in that there's now NOTHING following the two hyphens (just like "raw" Pukeout Excess). Your own separator is valid however. SignatureBrian {Hamilton Kelly} bhk@dsl.co.uk "We can no longer stand apart from Europe if we would. Yet we are untrained to mix with our neighbours, or even talk to them". George Macaulay Trevelyan, 1919 >>> Select the "Western European (ISO)" option for the "International >>> Settings". That should work. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Yup, it looks good. So far, but I've found in the past that OE does not stick to its defaults. Sometimes it switches to some other encoding from a message you have replied to. I haven't managed to get it to do that repeatably though, so I can't work out why it does it some times and not others. -- Regards John >>>> Select the "Western European (ISO)" option for the "International >>>> Settings". That should work. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > you have replied to. I haven't managed to get it to do that repeatably > though, so I can't work out why it does it some times and not others. Yes, that happens sometimes, and I don't know why nor how to prevent that. SignatureSkitt (in Hayward, California) www.geocities.com/opus731/ > > Select the "Western European (ISO)" option for the "International > > Settings". That should work. > Right, I've done that now. Now let's see if it works. > Thanks for the advice. What's at the bottom of this message looks > better already. > -- > Mike Stevens, narrowboat Felis Catus II > Web site www.mike-stevens.co.uk > No man is an island. So is Man. Well, you've got rid of the hatted-W character I saw but you don't have a space after the two dashes. Signaturehttp://www.dacha.freeuk.com/free/ Free Software: !Jclean - JPEG cleaner & transformer >>> Select the "Western European (ISO)" option for the "International >>> Settings". That should work. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Well, you've got rid of the hatted-W character I saw but you don't > have a space after the two dashes. OE, even with QF, chops the space when sending messages. When replying to them, OE with QF does delete the sig, even with the missing space. I believe that you don't see a space after my two dashes either, right? SignatureSkitt (in Hayward, California) www.geocities.com/opus731/ >OE, even with QF, chops the space when sending messages. When replying to >them, OE with QF does delete the sig, even with the missing space. > >I believe that you don't see a space after my two dashes either, right? Wrong. Moving the cursor over it shows that the space is there. SignatureJohn Hall "The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." George Bernard Shaw >> OE, even with QF, chops the space when sending messages. When >> replying to them, OE with QF does delete the sig, even with the [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Wrong. Moving the cursor over it shows that the space is there. Oh. I didn't know that. Good. It didn't use to be that way. SignatureSkitt (in Hayward, California) www.geocities.com/opus731/ >> >"Skitt" <skitt99@comcast.net> wrote in message >> >> Mmm, yeah. I'm at a loss as to what to call the yards and inches [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > 21 CFR 101.105 I have just heard that the "Freedom Tower" is planned to be 1776 feet high. Another blow against the establishment of the metric system in the USA - althoug a building of a tower 1776 meters high would surely be more impressive. S& >>>>"Skitt" <skitt99@comcast.net> wrote in message >>>> [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > the USA - althoug a building of a tower 1776 meters high would surely > be more impressive. I suppose it was originally meant to be the "French Tower" and when they changed the name, they changed the measuring system. SignatureRob Bannister > I have just heard that the "Freedom Tower" is planned to be 1776 feet > high. Another blow against the establishment of the metric system in > the USA - althoug a building of a tower 1776 meters high would surely > be more impressive. And moreover allow membership of the Mile High Club for those with a fear of flying. SignatureBrian {Hamilton Kelly} bhk@dsl.co.uk "We can no longer stand apart from Europe if we would. Yet we are untrained to mix with our neighbours, or even talk to them". George Macaulay Trevelyan, 1919 > > I have just heard that the "Freedom Tower" is planned to be 1776 > > feet high. Another blow against the establishment of the metric > > system in the USA - althoug a building of a tower 1776 meters high > > would surely be more impressive. > And moreover allow membership of the Mile High Club for those with a > fear of flying. But surely, it would then have to be the 1.609 Kilometre High Club? Signaturehttp://www.dacha.freeuk.com/grough/ We have a dog, His name is Grough, His voice is too, When he says "Woof!" >> > I have just heard that the "Freedom Tower" is planned to be 1776 >> > feet high. Another blow against the establishment of the metric [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >But surely, it would then have to be the 1.609 Kilometre High Club? But he whole business will be dwarfed by he space elevator now under study by NASA. It seems our technology is still a bit short of this, but when it arrives, one should be able to push the button to the zillionth floor and arrive in orbit. Hopefully there will be a coke machine and a sandwich machine on the elevator, plus WC facilities. S& >>>>I have just heard that the "Freedom Tower" is planned to be 1776 >>>>feet high. Another blow against the establishment of the metric [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > zillionth floor and arrive in orbit. Hopefully there will be a coke > machine and a sandwich machine on the elevator, plus WC facilities. And *no* muzak... SignatureLaura (emulate St. George for email) > >But surely, it would then have to be the 1.609 Kilometre High Club? > But he whole business will be dwarfed by he space elevator now under > study by NASA. It seems our technology is still a bit short of this, > but when it arrives, one should be able to push the button to the > zillionth floor and arrive in orbit. Hopefully there will be a coke > machine and a sandwich machine on the elevator, plus WC facilities. You get your coke out of a machine? Wow! That really is the height of, er, highness.... Signaturehttp://www.dacha.freeuk.com/joachim/03-0.htm One day, as Achilles was idly picking at his toenails with the end of his spear, an old Greek philosopher sidled up to him. "Wanna race?" said the ancient. >> I can tell you that it's real fun to be raised with metric measuring >> and being a left-hand-fork user and then move to an English-measure [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Hmmmm. > The English use metric some of the time > and left hand fork. when it suits them. SignatureMike Stevens, narrowboat Felis Catus II Web site www.mike-stevens.co.uk No man is an island. So is Man. > > and left hand fork. > > when it suits them. Indeed. For a meal that requires cutting (e.g. meat and veg) I use knife in right, and fork in left, prongs down, without changing hands. For a stir-fry, rice or pasta dish, I will use the fork in the right hand, prongs up, like a spoon, without a knife. I think this is quite common in the UK. What is not common here with the first kind of meal is to cut everything up first and then change hands with the fork. We cut as we go. Cheers, Tony SignatureTony Mountifield Work: tony@softins.co.uk - http://www.softins.co.uk Play: tony@mountifield.org - http://tony.mountifield.org > Indeed. For a meal that requires cutting (e.g. meat and veg) I use > knife in right, and fork in left, prongs down, without changing [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > first kind of meal is to cut everything up first and then change > hands with the fork. We cut as we go. The US practice seems to follow two simple rules: Only ever hold the knife in your right hand. Only ever put food in your mouth with your right hand. Put these two together and you finish up continually changing hands. SignatureAlec McKenzie mckenzie@despammed.com > > Indeed. For a meal that requires cutting (e.g. meat and veg) I use > > knife in right, and fork in left, prongs down, without changing [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Put these two together and you finish up continually changing hands. Makes it sound as though we are practicing Muslim habits. I can't remember if I asked or if it was answered here before, but how do lefty Muslms eat? >> > Indeed. For a meal that requires cutting (e.g. meat and veg) I use >> > knife in right, and fork in left, prongs down, without changing [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >I can't remember if I asked or if it was answered here before, but how do >lefty Muslms eat? Perhaps the evil connotations originated about "sinister" because of Muslim implications. S& "sand" wrote in message > Perhaps the evil connotations originated about "sinister" because of > Muslim implications. Sinister is "left" in Latin and the Romans believed the left side of anything was the unlucky side. For the superstitious, a left-handed person was therefore suspect. In the Bible, God's "right hand" is synonymous with strength and salvation. In Islamic countries, the left hand is considered unclean and not to be used for food consumption. And I believe the French word for left is "gauche" ? which has come to mean clumsy in English. Left-handed people have been given a raw deal historically. But it is not all bad news - some reports suggest left-handers are proportionately more perceptive and artistic than right-handers. -- Peg > I can't remember if I asked or if it was answered here before, but how do > lefty Muslms eat? With their right hands, I assume. Eating with the "wrong" hand is not so difficult; it's not like writing. I doubt I could manage chopsticks with my left hand. A left-handed Muslim in a Chinese restaurant might be in a bit of a pickle. SignatureThis e-mail is a spam trap. Send to "moliver" at the obvious domain name for my organization (the whole school, not just the department). >> I can't remember if I asked or if it was answered here before, but how do >> lefty Muslms eat? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >I doubt I could manage chopsticks with my left hand. Interesting point; it never occurred to me. I tried it just now and found, after half a minute of adaption, that I had no problem. I could pick up a thin sliver of paper -- the Japanese test -- without difficulty. Managing a full plate of rice, and so forth, with the wrong hand might well be another story. SignatureCharles Riggs Email address: chriggs¦at¦eircom¦dot¦net > > I can't remember if I asked or if it was answered here before, but how do > > lefty Muslms eat? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > I doubt I could manage chopsticks with my left hand. A left-handed > Muslim in a Chinese restaurant might be in a bit of a pickle. I'm a lefty, and I was "corrected" to use the right hand when I was a child, because at that time, using the left hand to eat or write was considered somewhat bad manners. Now I could do it with either hand, but I usually write with my right hand and hold chopsticks with my left hand. To me, eating with the "wrong" hand was not easier than writing with the "wrong" hand. -- Nobuko Iwasaki > The US practice seems to follow two simple rules: > Only ever hold the knife in your right hand. > Only ever put food in your mouth with your right hand. Hmm; is the left hand perceived of as being "unclean"? Perhaps they're all Moslems? <gd&rfc> SignatureBrian {Hamilton Kelly} bhk@dsl.co.uk "We can no longer stand apart from Europe if we would. Yet we are untrained to mix with our neighbours, or even talk to them". George Macaulay Trevelyan, 1919 >>The US practice seems to follow two simple rules: >>Only ever hold the knife in your right hand. >>Only ever put food in your mouth with your right hand. > > Hmm; is the left hand perceived of as being "unclean"? Perhaps they're > all Moslems? Well, you got us. That's why there are so many Muslims that don't like us. Muslims and Moslems don't really get along. I think the real answer is something like this: Most people, being right-handed, want to cut with the right hand. But if you then take the chunk of food to your mouth with the left hand, it looks as though you couldn't wait to eat it, even for the trifling time it would take to set down the knife and take the fork in your right hand. IOW it was perceived as gluttonous, back when folks thought there was something WWT. > >>The US practice seems to follow two simple rules: Only ever hold > >>the knife in your right hand. Only ever put food in your mouth with > >>your right hand. > > > > Hmm; is the left hand perceived of as being "unclean"? Perhaps > > they're all Moslems? > Well, you got us. That's why there are so many Muslims that don't > like us. Muslims and Moslems don't really get along. > I think the real answer is something like this: Most people, being > right-handed, want to cut with the right hand. But if you then take > the chunk of food to your mouth with the left hand, it looks as > though you couldn't wait to eat it, even for the trifling time it > would take to set down the knife and take the fork in your right hand. > IOW it was perceived as gluttonous, back when folks thought there was > something WWT. Do the Yanks transfer the knife to the cack hand in order to push their peas onto the fork in their right hand? No? Well, I suppose that supports my long held belief that the right-hand use of the fork stems from the inability to use both hands together in concord. Signaturehttp://www.dacha.freeuk.com/aureole/ Aureole: Dacha's Golden Treasury - A Pot Pourri Of Verse And Images > Do the Yanks transfer the knife to the cack hand in order to push their > peas onto the fork in their right hand? No? Well, I suppose that > supports my long held belief that the right-hand use of the fork stems > from the inability to use both hands together in concord. Gluttony again. A temperate eater is expected to be satisfied with the peas he can pick up with the unaided fork. SignatureThis e-mail is a spam trap. Send to "moliver" at the obvious domain name for my organization (the whole school, not just the department). > > Do the Yanks transfer the knife to the cack hand in order to push their > > peas onto the fork in their right hand? No? Well, I suppose that [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Gluttony again. A temperate eater is expected to be satisfied > with the peas he can pick up with the unaided fork. I always eat my peas with honey, I've done so all my life. It makes the peas taste rather funny, But keeps them on my knife. - Ogden Nash SignatureAlec McKenzie mckenzie@despammed.com >>>Do the Yanks transfer the knife to the cack hand in order to push their >>>peas onto the fork in their right hand? No? Well, I suppose that [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > - Ogden Nash I think that's attributable to Anon, rather than Nash. SignatureLaura (emulate St. George for email) > >>>Do the Yanks transfer the knife to the cack hand in order to push > >>>their peas onto the fork in their right hand? No? Well, I suppose [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > > > - Ogden Nash > I think that's attributable to Anon, rather than Nash. But Anon wasn't American, was he? Signaturehttp://www.dacha.freeuk.com/ How to make people and influence fiends >>>>>Do the Yanks transfer the knife to the cack hand in order to push >>>>>their peas onto the fork in their right hand? No? Well, I suppose [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > But Anon wasn't American, was he? I don't think we know what nationality she was, do we? SignatureLaura (emulate St. George for email) > > But Anon wasn't American, was he? > I don't think we know what nationality she was, do we? Can we accept it's human? Signaturehttp://www.dacha.freeuk.com/free/ Free Software: !Jack - JPEG repair application >>>But Anon wasn't American, was he? > >>I don't think we know what nationality she was, do we? > > Can we accept it's human? Not necessarily. Those monkeys may be churning out original stuff in their breaks from Shakespeare. SignatureLaura (emulate St. George for email) >>>> But Anon wasn't American, was he? >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Not necessarily. Those monkeys may be churning out original stuff in > their breaks from Shakespeare. I never worked out whether those monkeys were Civil Servants or Privatised Monkeys. Had they been permitted / encouraged to join a Trade Union? Were they able to elect Health and Safety reps? -- John Dean Oxford De-frag to reply > I never worked out whether those monkeys were Civil Servants or > Privatised Monkeys. Had they been permitted / encouraged to join a > Trade Union? Were they able to elect Health and Safety reps? They're still counting the vote. SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |To express oneself 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |In seventeen syllables Palo Alto, CA 94304 |Is very diffic | Tony Finch kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com (650)857-7572 http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ "Laura F Spira" <laura@DRAGONspira.fsbusiness.co.uk> wrote... > > I always eat my peas with honey, > > I've done so all my life. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > I think that's attributable to Anon, rather than Nash. If ever there was a poem with "Spike Milligan" stamped all over it, it's that one. I think it should be: I eat my peas with honey, I've done it all my life. It makes the peas taste funny, But it keeps them on my knife. Matti >> Do the Yanks transfer the knife to the cack hand in order to push >> their peas onto the fork in their right hand? No? Well, I suppose [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Gluttony again. A temperate eater is expected to be satisfied > with the peas he can pick up with the unaided fork. I always eat peas with honey. I've done it all my life. They do taste rather funny, But it keeps them on the knife. (I can't remember the source.) SignatureMike Stevens, narrowboat Felis Catus II Web site www.mike-stevens.co.uk No man is an island. So is Man. >> Do the Yanks transfer the knife to the cack hand in order to push their >> peas onto the fork in their right hand? No? Well, I suppose that [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Gluttony again. A temperate eater is expected to be satisfied >with the peas he can pick up with the unaided fork. Is mashing them through the tines permitted? SignatureCharles Riggs Email address: chriggs¦at¦eircom¦dot¦net > > The US practice seems to follow two simple rules: > > Only ever hold the knife in your right hand. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > <gd&rfc> Actually, the true reason is somewhat fascinating (at least I found it so). According to Petroski's _The Evolution of Useful Things_, the fork is a relatively late invention. When they were introduced in Europe, the common practice was to eat with a knife in each hand: one was used to hold the food and the other to cut. Naturally, the cutting was done with the strong hand, and the weak-hand knife, which was already stabbing the food, was used to transfer the food to the mouth. The fork, which started out with two tines, was an improvement over the weak-hand knife, as it prevented the food from turning while being cut. In America, by contrast, the common practice when the fork was introduced was to eat with a knife and a spoon. Like the second knife, the spoon was used to stabilize the food for cutting, but the greater dexterity required for manipulation, meant that people were already in the habit of transfering it to the strong hand and, of course, using it bowl up. This extra dance also led to the habit of cutting several pieces at a time. The fork was an improvement as it kept the food from slipping while being cut and also didn't require the food to be pushed into the bowl, but the basic pattern was retained. SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |I believe there are more instances 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |of the abridgment of the freedom of Palo Alto, CA 94304 |the people by gradual and silent |encroachments of those in power kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com |than by violent and sudden (650)857-7572 |usurpations. | James Madison http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ "Evan Kirshenbaum" <kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com> wrote in message > Actually, the true reason is somewhat fascinating (at least I found it > so). According to Petroski's _The Evolution of Useful Things_, the [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > being cut. In America, by contrast, the common practice when the fork > was introduced was to eat with a knife and a spoon. (snip) According to Alison Weir, in her book Henry VIII, King and Court, the table fork was an Italian invention just coming into vogue in courtly life, used to serve food but not yet used as an eating utensil in England. Each person brought his own eating knife and it was customary to eat with a knife and one's fingers. The left hand took food from the communal bowls, the knife was used for cutting, and the thumb and first two fingers of the right hand were used for eating. Spoons of course were used for liquid food. -- Peg > According to Alison Weir, in her book Henry VIII, King and Court, the table > fork was an Italian invention just coming into vogue in courtly life, used > to serve food but not yet used as an eating utensil in England. No, the fork was used as a table utensil during the reign of Henry VII (and hence contemporaneous with Columbus). SignatureBrian {Hamilton Kelly} bhk@dsl.co.uk "We can no longer stand apart from Europe if we would. Yet we are untrained to mix with our neighbours, or even talk to them". George Macaulay Trevelyan, 1919 > > According to Alison Weir, in her book Henry VIII, King and Court, > > the table fork was an Italian invention just coming into vogue in [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > No, the fork was used as a table utensil during the reign of Henry > VII (and hence contemporaneous with Columbus). In England? Petroski says "Not until the seventeenth century did the fork appear in England", and describes Thomas Coryate, who observed the custom in Italy in 1608 and Hereupon I myself thought to imitate the Italian fashion by this forked cutting of meat, not only while I was in Italy, but also in Germany, and oftentimes in England since I came home. Petroski notes that Coryate was jokingly called "Furcifer," which meant literally "fork bearer," but which also meant "gallows bird," or one who deserved to be hanged. Forks spread slowlyin England, for the utensil was much ridiculed as "an effeminate piece of finery," according to the historian of inventions John Beckmann. He documented further the initial reaction to the fork by quoting from a contemporary dramatist who wrote of a "fork-carving traveller" being spoken of "with much contempt." Furthermore, no less a playwright than Ben Jonson could get laughs for his characters by questioning, in _The Devil Is an a.s_, first produced in 1616, The laudable use of forks, Brought into custom here as they are in Italy, To the sparing of napkins. But the new fashion was soon being taken more seriously, for Jonson could also write, in _Volpone_, "Then must you learn the use and handling of your silver fork at meals." _The Evolution of Useful Things_, pp. 8-10. SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |The law of supply and demand tells us 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |that when the price of something is Palo Alto, CA 94304 |artificially set below market level, |there will soon be none of that thing kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com |left--as you may have noticed the (650)857-7572 |last time you tried to buy something |for nothing. http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ | P.J. O'Rourke > > > According to Alison Weir, in her book Henry VIII, King and Court, > > > the table fork was an Italian invention just coming into vogue in [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > fork appear in England", and describes Thomas Coryate, who observed > the custom in Italy in 1608 and [...] But the disastrous Henry VIII was noted at least for the gentility of his table. He had lots of very fine tablecloths, for example: none of your hollowed-out-of-the-table place-settings or wooden trenchers for him. (Later on, nouvelle cuisine seems to have been one of the features of James VI/I's dining-room: fancy little plate-served dishes of herby salmon with beetroot, and so on.) Mike. [forks and etiquette] > Actually, the true reason is somewhat fascinating (at least I found it > so). According to Petroski's _The Evolution of Useful Things_, the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > over the weak-hand knife, as it prevented the food from turning while > being cut. That two-pronged fork was introduced in the late C15th, so it could have been known to Columbus. > In America, by contrast, the common practice when the fork > was introduced was to eat with a knife and a spoon. Like the second > knife, the spoon was used to stabilize the food for cutting, but the I'm surprised that transportees were permitted knives... :-) SignatureBrian {Hamilton Kelly} bhk@dsl.co.uk "We can no longer stand apart from Europe if we would. Yet we are untrained to mix with our neighbours, or even talk to them". George Macaulay Trevelyan, 1919 >[forks and etiquette] > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > >:-) Had the early settlement of America been by the Swiss instead of the English, we'd be eating with utensils that include knife, fork, spoon, awl, corkscrew, scissors, screwdriver, and toothpick all in one unit. Alec McKenzie infrared: >The US practice seems to follow two simple rules: >Only ever hold the knife in your right hand. >Only ever put food in your mouth with your right hand. > >Put these two together and you finish up continually changing hands. If you washed your hands after going to the toilet, you wouldn't need to go to all that trouble. SignaturePeter Moylan Peter.Moylan@newcastle.edu.au http://eepjm.newcastle.edu.au (OS/2 and eCS information and software) >Alec McKenzie infrared: > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >If you washed your hands after going to the toilet, you wouldn't >need to go to all that trouble. Gentlemen wash their hands before going, there being no need to afterwards. Harvard men before, Yale men afterwards, as everyone also knows. SignatureCharles Riggs Email address: chriggs¦at¦eircom¦dot¦net > For a meal that requires cutting (e.g. meat and veg) I use > knife in right, and fork in left, prongs down, without changing [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > first kind of meal is to cut everything up first and then change > hands with the fork. We cut as we go. Cutting up everything first is not done in fine company anywhere, but that is the part that makes the American system such a chore, even though I have switched to it, so as not to be judged "different". SignatureSkitt (in Hayward, California) www.geocities.com/opus731/ >Cutting up everything first is not done in fine company anywhere, Isn't it a practice followed only by children? SignatureCharles Riggs Email address: chriggs¦at¦eircom¦dot¦net >>Cutting up everything first is not done in fine company anywhere, > >Isn't it a practice followed only by children? Mothers and helpers for stroke victims also do it. Best regards, Spehro Pefhany Signature"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward" speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com >> Cutting up everything first is not done in fine company anywhere, > > Isn't it a practice followed only by children? I'd say that it is done *for* shildren. SignatureSkitt (in Hayward, California) www.geocities.com/opus731/ >>> Cutting up everything first is not done in fine company anywhere, >> >> Isn't it a practice followed only by children? > > I'd say that it is done *for* shildren. OK, it's late and I can't type. See you all tomorrow ... SignatureSkitt (in Hayward, California) www.geocities.com/opus731/ > > >> Cutting up everything first is not done in fine company anywhere, > > > > Isn't it a practice followed only by children? > I'd say that it is done *for* shildren. I know what's done *for* shildren - and it's often done after a little too much (but not a lot too much) alcohol. Signaturehttp://www.dacha.freeuk.com/photo/0z06-0.htm Mist over Ladybower, seen from the Yorkshire border >>> Cutting up everything first is not done in fine company anywhere, >> >> Isn't it a practice followed only by children? > >I'd say that it is done *for* shildren. *By* this shild, though. I also, when a mini-adult, ate first the one thing, then the next, then the next, until everything was gone. SignatureCharles Riggs Email address: chriggs¦at¦eircom¦dot¦net In alt.usage.english, Charles Riggs wrote: >I also, when a mini-adult, ate first the one >thing, then the next, then the next, until everything was gone. Just last month I met someone who did exactly that. He was about 60 and Canadian. I didn't get to find out how he tackled alphabet soup. SignatureMike Barnes Cheshire, England >In alt.usage.english, Charles Riggs wrote: >>I also, when a mini-adult, ate first the one >>thing, then the next, then the next, until everything was gone. > >Just last month I met someone who did exactly that. He was about 60 and >Canadian. I didn't get to find out how he tackled alphabet soup. Probably he started with "A". S& >>In alt.usage.english, Charles Riggs wrote: >>>I also, when a mini-adult, ate first the one >>>thing, then the next, then the next, until everything was gone. >> >>Just last month I met someone who did exactly that. He was about 60 and >>Canadian. Allowances must be made for Canadians, lovely people that they are. >> I didn't get to find out how he tackled alphabet soup. > >Probably he started with "A". How else? Back in my alphabet soup days, I knew no better way. I won't even be able to revert to that practice today for I'll be having my version of Irish leek soup -- after I prepare it, that is. SignatureCharles Riggs Email address: chriggs¦at¦eircom¦dot¦net >>Cutting up everything first is not done in fine company anywhere, > >Isn't it a practice followed only by children? It is also a factor in oriental cooking as it is rather a problem to cut a steak with a pair of chopsticks. S& > >>Cutting up everything first is not done in fine company anywhere, > > > >Isn't it a practice followed only by children? > It is also a factor in oriental cooking as it is rather a problem to > cut a steak with a pair of chopsticks. Makes you wonder why they're called chopsticks then. Signaturehttp://www.dacha.freeuk.com/zodiac/2tau-0.htm Taurus (April 21st - May 21st) Vrishabha - the Bull Hathor | > >>Cutting up everything first is not done in fine company anywhere, | > > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] | | Makes you wonder why they're called chopsticks then. Chop is *food* in Chinese. So they are food sticks. SignatureDave Fawthrop <dave@hyphenologist.co.uk> When posting on usenet one is talking to all those subscribed to that newsgroup, not any individual. >| > >>Cutting up everything first is not done in fine company anywhere, >| > > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >Chop is *food* in Chinese. So they are food sticks. It is? Do you know "chopsticks" are not called that in Chinese? They are called "kuai zi" in Mandarin. "Kuai" has the "bamboo" radical in it. The "chop" in "chop suey" is from Cantonese meaning something like "miscellaneous", and I believe it is unrelated. Best regards, Spehro Pefhany Signature"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward" speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com >>| Makes you wonder why they're called chopsticks then. >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >it. The "chop" in "chop suey" is from Cantonese meaning something like >"miscellaneous", and I believe it is unrelated. I had read somewhere that "chop" also means personal mark or signature but I am not sure what language that might be. My memory places it as said by a member of the British empire speaking of a native. S& >>>| Makes you wonder why they're called chopsticks then. >>> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >but I am not sure what language that might be. My memory places it as >said by a member of the British empire speaking of a native. According to M-W, it is from the Hindi word (chAp) for stamp. Presumably we can credit or blame the Brits for applying it to the official stamps used in China. Best regards, Spehro Pefhany Signature"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward" speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com > >>>| Makes you wonder why they're called chopsticks then. > >>> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Presumably we can credit or blame the Brits for applying it to the > official stamps used in China. Long, long ago, there was a comic strip named Smilin' Jack, in which there was a cook. I can't remember the fat little Chinese guy's name, but he had a lovely queue, and a horrible temper, running around with a cleaver, sweating and emoting all over the place. That was during WWII. I think the cook frequently yelled "chop-chop", and swung his cleaver viciously. The meaning of the expression seemed to be "right away" or "in a quick hurry". (Picture John Belushi's Samurai chef on SNL, but not as cruel.) (Please correct me, anyone who can recall http://web.wt.net/~clarkcom/Index.html anything about "Smilin' Jack" also: http://www.toonopedia.com/smilin_j.htm on this page a companion named Fatstuff is described as Hawaiian, and I can recall his buttons popping, but not the cleaver, so I may have the "chop-chop" image merged into the picture from another comic strip. Maybe Blackhawk? Help me?) I see the strip ran from 1933 to 1973, but I can only recall the war years. (We moved to another town and the local paper didn't run that strip. Anyway, sorry for the digression, Spehro, but you seem to be able to find or know some meanings and origins for these words. The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition. 2000. Chop-chop PRONUNCIATION: chpchp ADVERB: Informal Right away; quickly. ETYMOLOGY: Pidgin English, reduplication of chop, quick. See chopstick. I always assumed this expression came from the Chinese food preparation which involved a lot of fast chopping, not to mention fast cooking (stir-fry). >> >>>| Makes you wonder why they're called chopsticks then. >> >>> [quoted text clipped - 45 lines] >which involved a lot of fast chopping, not to mention fast cooking >(stir-fry). I don't know. M-W has essentially the same thing. Main Entry: chop-chop Pronunciation: "chäp-'chäp, 'chäp-' Function: adverb Etymology: Chinese Pidgin English, reduplication of chop fast Date: 1834 : without delay : QUICKLY I suspect we'd need somebody fluent in Cantonese to speculate further on a possible Chinese language connection, but "chop", in English, has long had "a quick action" as a possible meaning. Here's an amusing quotation from the Compact OED supplement on "chop suey": 1904 Rochester Post-Express 8 June 12 One of the Chinese merchants of New York.. explained that chop suey is really an American dish, not known in China, but believed by Americans to be the one great national dish of the Celestials. Best regards, Spehro Pefhany Signature"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward" speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com >That was during WWII. I think the cook frequently yelled "chop-chop", and >swung his cleaver viciously. The meaning of the expression seemed to be [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >I see the strip ran from 1933 to 1973, but I can only recall the war years. >(We moved to another town and the local paper didn't run that strip. I can't remember the cook's name, but I do remember the cleaver. The fat guy with the buttons popping off, and beadlets of sweat flying around, was a different character. I thought he was Mexican, but perhaps Hawaiian is right. > (Please correct me, anyone who can recall > http://web.wt.net/~clarkcom/Index.html anything about "Smilin' Jack" also: > http://www.toonopedia.com/smilin_j.htm on this page a companion named > Fatstuff is described as Hawaiian, and I can recall his buttons popping, but > not the cleaver, so I may have the "chop-chop" image merged into the picture > from another comic strip. Maybe Blackhawk? Help me?) There was definitely a "Chop Chop" in Blackhawk. He changed a bit over the years: Of all the Blackhawk characters, the Chinese-born member known originally as Chop Chop would change the most. The bucktoothed "little Chinaman" was too offensive to postwar readers, and so he grew in height, lost his "so solly" lisp, became a martial-arts expert, and adopted the name Wu Chen. http://www.geocities.com/mbrown123/greatest_comics/militarycomics1.html SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |Pious Jews have a category of 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |questions that can harmlessly be Palo Alto, CA 94304 |allowed to go without an answer |until the Messiah comes. I suspect kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com |that this is one of them. (650)857-7572 | Joseph C. Fineman http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ > > (Please correct me, anyone who can recall > > http://web.wt.net/~clarkcom/Index.html anything about "Smilin' Jack" also: [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > grew in height, lost his "so solly" lisp, became a martial-arts > expert, and adopted the name Wu Chen. http://www.geocities.com/mbrown123/greatest_comics/militarycomics1.html Thanks, Evan. This was a great site (from main page on throughout). I never saw the later incarnation of Chop-Chop, but as I described him I can see he would not have survived very long after the war, when we became so involved in the strife between the noble Chinese factions. And, of course, nowadays he would be so un-PC. Hawk-a-a-a-a! >> I had read somewhere that "chop" also means personal mark or >> signature but I am not sure what language that might be. My memory [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Presumably we can credit or blame the Brits for applying it to the > official stamps used in China. It must be a fairly widespread word, because it is also found in Indonesian. 'Batik cap (or tjap)' is the batik cloth made by applying the wax with a stamp. Does the word go back to Sanskrit? -- Regards John > >> I had read somewhere that "chop" also means personal mark or > >> signature but I am not sure what language that might be. My memory [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Indonesian. 'Batik cap (or tjap)' is the batik cloth made by applying > the wax with a stamp. Does the word go back to Sanskrit? According to _Hobson-Jobson_, Hindi _chAp_ "seems not to have been traced back with any accuracy beyond the modern vernaculars." The meaning of 'stamp, seal' was lost in India, but ended up spreading to Malay and to pidginized English in China. In any case, there's no etymological relation to the pidginized _chop_ of _chopsticks_ and _chop-chop_ (from Cantonese _gap1_ 'quick'). http://dsal.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/HOB.sh?WORD=chop http://dsal.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/HOB.sh?WORD=chop-chop http://dsal.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/HOB.sh?WORD=chopsticks > >| > >>Cutting up everything first is not done in fine company anywhere, > >| > > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > it. The "chop" in "chop suey" is from Cantonese meaning something like > "miscellaneous", and I believe it is unrelated. The dictionaries I consulted which give etymologies all derived the "chop" in "chopsticks" ultimately from the Cantonese equivalent of that word "kuai." Sir Henry Yule's *Hobson-Jobson* gave the most detail, and his suggestion for how the word came about sounds to me likely to be correct: From http://dsal.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/HOB.pg.sh?PID=210 [quote, with <ŭ> replaced by <ù>] *CHOPSTICKS,* s. The sticks used in pairs by the Chinese in feeding themselves. The Chinese name of the article is '_kwai-tsz,_' 'speedy-ones.' "Possibly the inventor of the present word, hearing that the Chinese name had this meaning, and accustomed to the phrase _chop-chop_ for 'speedily,' used _chop_ as a translation" (_Bishop Moule_). [Prof. Giles writes: "The _N.E.D._ gives incorrectly _kwai-tze, i.e._ 'nimble boys,' 'nimble ones.' Even Sir H. Yule is not without blemish. He leaves the aspirate out of _kwai,_ of which the official orthography is now _k'uai-k'uai-tzù,_ 'hasteners,' the termination _-ers_ bringing out the value of _tzù,_ an enclitic particle, better than 'ones.' Bishop Moule's suggestion is on the right track. I think, however, that *chopstick* came from a Chinaman, who of course knew the meaning of _k'uai_ and applied it accordingly, using the 'pidgin' word *chop* as the, to him, natural equivalent"] [end quote] SignatureRaymond S. Wise Minneapolis, Minnesota USA E-mail: mplsray @ yahoo . com >>> Cutting up everything first is not done in fine company anywhere, >> >> Isn't it a practice followed only by children? > > It is also a factor in oriental cooking as it is rather a problem to > cut a steak with a pair of chopsticks. Filipino cooking is similar, and most of the time the silverware on the table consists of only a fork and a tablespoon. After a meal, I have to straighten out bent spoons that have been used for cutting up whatever needed cut up. SignatureSkitt (in Hayward, California) www.geocities.com/opus731/ >>>Cutting up everything first is not done in fine company anywhere, >> >>Isn't it a practice followed only by children? > >It is also a factor in oriental cooking as it is rather a problem to >cut a steak with a pair of chopsticks. OK, but we're talking eating not cooking, right? SignatureCharles Riggs Email address: chriggs¦at¦eircom¦dot¦net >>>>Cutting up everything first is not done in fine company anywhere, >>> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >OK, but we're talking eating not cooking, right? OK, but I always assumed cooking was done to accommodate eating. S& >>>>>Cutting up everything first is not done in fine company anywhere, >>>> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >OK, but I always assumed cooking was done to accommodate eating. First comes the cooking, if cooking, then comes the eating: two separate things, different implements being used for each. I assume you don't, for example, eat out of the pan. SignatureCharles Riggs Email address: chriggs¦at¦eircom¦dot¦net >>>>>>Cutting up everything first is not done in fine company anywhere, >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >separate things, different implements being used for each. I assume >you don't, for example, eat out of the pan. I habitually do my own cooking and live alone and am very short on ceremony. I do not lay out napkins nor lay out a line of silverware nor light a candelabra and, although I mostly use a plate and a glass, I have been known to eat out of the pan and drink my milk from the container and wipe my mouth with the back of my hand (which I subsequently wash). And I do not nor care to use chopsticks. S& > I have been known to eat out of the pan and drink my milk from the > container and wipe my mouth with the back of my hand (which I > subsequently wash). And I do not nor care to use chopsticks. They're bloody useless for milk, I can tell you! Signaturehttp://www.dacha.freeuk.com/joachim/14-0.htm "Note that one night too, the three blutwursts for Lohengrin's five very sick swans even got ate by nine. That's ten incidents!" >> I have been known to eat out of the pan and drink my milk from the >> container and wipe my mouth with the back of my hand (which I >> subsequently wash). And I do not nor care to use chopsticks. > >They're bloody useless for milk, I can tell you! I have often wondered why chopsticks were not fabricated from tubes which could be used as straws for drinking. S& > >> I have been known to eat out of the pan and drink my milk from the > >> container and wipe my mouth with the back of my hand (which I > >> subsequently wash). And I do not nor care to use chopsticks. > >They're bloody useless for milk, I can tell you! > I have often wondered why chopsticks were not fabricated from tubes > which could be used as straws for drinking. Good idea. I wonder if this concept could be combined with putting a sharp point on chopsticks so they could used for stabbing morsels and conveying them to the mouth. A tube with a sharp point is not easy to visualize, but I suppose the entry to the tube could be on the side, leaving the end free to be sharp. > S& "Bob Cunningham" <exw6sxq@earthlink.net> wrote... > A tube with a sharp point is not easy to visualize, but I > suppose the entry to the tube could be on the side, leaving > the end free to be sharp. Here in Britain a common type of toothpick is in the form of a plastic tube, one end of which is shaped as a nib-like point. Matti sand wrote: > I have often wondered why chopsticks were not fabricated from tubes > which could be used as straws for drinking. > Good idea. I wonder if this concept could be combined with putting a > sharp point on chopsticks so they could used for stabbing morsels and [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > entry to the tube could be on the side, leaving the end free to be > sharp. But then you won't be able to reach the bottom to get the last of the fluids; and you still have to face icecream. I can't imagine the chopstraw ever overtaking the spork. > sand wrote: > > I have often wondered why chopsticks were not fabricated from tubes > > which could be used as straws for drinking. > > Good idea. I wonder if this concept could be combined with putting a > > sharp point on chopsticks so they could used for stabbing morsels and > > conveying them to the mouth. > > A tube with a sharp point is not easy to visualize, but I suppose the > > entry to the tube could be on the side, leaving the end free to be > > sharp. > But then you won't be able to reach the bottom to get the last of the > fluids; and you still have to face icecream. > I can't imagine the chopstraw ever overtaking the spork. Once we've combined the chopstick, the straw, and the stabber, a better name could be "chopstrork". In alt.usage.english, Bob Cunningham wrote: >A tube with a sharp point is not easy to visualize, but I >suppose the entry to the tube could be on the side, leaving >the end free to be sharp. You could have one stick with a tube and the other with a point. SignatureMike Barnes Cheshire, England > In alt.usage.english, Bob Cunningham wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > You could have one stick with a tube and the other with a point. Now, if you had one with 3 or 4 prongs and the other with a blade, you'd be getting somewhere. SignatureRob Bannister > > In alt.usage.english, Bob Cunningham wrote: > > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Now, if you had one with 3 or 4 prongs and the other with a blade, you'd > be getting somewhere. As long as we're going that far, why not have three: One with a blade, one with three or four tines, and one with an oval concavity that could be used to eat soup or ice cream? >>>In alt.usage.english, Bob Cunningham wrote: >>> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > with a blade, one with three or four tines, and one with an > oval concavity that could be used to eat soup or ice cream? Brilliant! Amazing a country with 4000 years of civilisation couldn't come up with something like that. SignatureRob Bannister >A tube with a sharp point is not easy to visualize, Never seen a hypodermic needle? > but I >suppose the entry to the tube could be on the side, leaving >the end free to be sharp. The hypodermic needle tube is cut at an angle to make the tip sharp and still allow entry of fluids. Medicine and blood is often sucked into the hypodermic needle. > >A tube with a sharp point is not easy to visualize, > Never seen a hypodermic needle? Not up close. > > but I > >suppose the entry to the tube could be on the side, leaving > >the end free to be sharp. > The hypodermic needle tube is cut at an angle to make the tip sharp > and still allow entry of fluids. Medicine and blood is often sucked > into the hypodermic needle. ObAUE: "Medicine and blood *is* often sucked" seems to refer to a mixture of medicine and blood. With any other interpretation, the singular verb is hard to accept. But a hypodermic needle sucking a mixture of medicine and blood must be somewhat unusual. > > > >A tube with a sharp point is not easy to visualize, [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > hypodermic needle sucking a mixture of medicine and blood > must be somewhat unusual. "Medicine *or* blood is ... " would have been good and would probably have fit the intended meaning. >> >> > >A tube with a sharp point is not easy to visualize, [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] >"Medicine *or* blood is ... " would have been good and would >probably have fit the intended meaning. I posted a similar statement before I read this. ObAUE: Is Bob correct including emphasis asterisks within the quote marks? Doesn't that say that the phrasing would be good if the phrasing included the asterisks? | > | > > >A tube with a sharp point is not easy to visualize, [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] | > > and still allow entry of fluids. Medicine and blood is often sucked | > > into the hypodermic needle. Way back in ?1947? The nurse used to sharpen one, at the described angle, before injecting me with penicillin. Thankfully things have moved on. | > ObAUE: "Medicine and blood *is* often sucked" seems to | > refer to a mixture of medicine and blood. With any other [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] | "Medicine *or* blood is ... " would have been good and would | probably have fit the intended meaning. Have you never seen a Heroin addict injecting? I have!!! That is exactly what happens. They use the appearance of blood to tell if they have found a vein. Take ****EXTREAME**** care with needles used by heroin addicts, They often have hepatitis* and sometimes AIDS through needles contaminated with blood. In the UK it is theoretically illegal to have a syringe used by a heroin addict because it still contains heroin a Class A Drug. (AFAIK no one has actually been prosecuted for this) (I have one in the back of my car ATM) See Sig. SignatureDave Fawthrop <dave@hyphenologist.co.uk> Chair, Bradford Curry Project <bradfordcurryproject@hyphenologist.co.uk> http://www.hyphenologist.co.uk/bradfordcurryproject >> >A tube with a sharp point is not easy to visualize, > >> Never seen a hypodermic needle? > >Not up close. They just squirt you from across the room? >> > but I >> >suppose the entry to the tube could be on the side, leaving [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >hypodermic needle sucking a mixture of medicine and blood >must be somewhat unusual. I thought about that before posting. Nothing sounded right. "Medicine and blood are..." still sounds like a mixture of both. "Medicine or blood are..." just doesn't sound right. "Medicine or blood is..." sounds the best even if it's wrong. Change the "and" to "or" and leave the "is". > >> >A tube with a sharp point is not easy to visualize, > > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > They just squirt you from across the room? I don't want to watch. > >> > but I > >> >suppose the entry to the tube could be on the side, leaving [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > "Medicine or blood is..." sounds the best even if it's wrong. Change > the "and" to "or" and leave the "is". "Medicine or blood is ... " is right. > > I thought about that before posting. Nothing sounded right. > > > > "Medicine and blood are..." still sounds like a mixture of both. > > "Medicine or blood are..." just doesn't sound right. "Medicine or > > blood is..." sounds the best even if it's wrong. Change the "and" > > to "or" and leave the "is". > "Medicine or blood is ... " is right. "Various fluids are..." would be much better, and less limiting! Signaturehttp://www.dacha.freeuk.com/cook/10pr-0.htm 33 Parkin Recipes >>> A tube with a sharp point is not easy to visualize, > >> Never seen a hypodermic needle? > > Not up close. The straws commonly packaged with juice boxes also have such a tube-with-point arrangement. SignatureJack Gavin sand wrote: > [...] And I do not nor care to use chopsticks. > They're bloody useless for milk, I can tell you! Fresh milk, at least. >> I have been known to eat out of the pan and drink my milk from the >> container and wipe my mouth with the back of my hand (which I >> subsequently wash). And I do not nor care to use chopsticks. > >They're bloody useless for milk, I can tell you! The wooden ones are easier to light than candelabra, though. > And I do not nor care to use chopsticks. Something about the syntax of this sentence makes my head hurt. I think the "nor" is trying to join two objects of different kinds - a modal auxiliary ("do not") and an ordinary verb ("care to"). I would have written "I do not use nor care to use chopsticks." -Aaron J. Dinkin Dr. Whom > > And I do not nor care to use chopsticks. > > Something about the syntax of this sentence makes my head hurt. I think > the "nor" is trying to join two objects of different kinds - a modal > auxiliary ("do not") and an ordinary verb ("care to"). I would have > written "I do not use nor care to use chopsticks." If I think about that long enough, it starts to have a problem with parallelism. Maybe it should be "I do not use nor do I care to use chopsticks". >> > And I do not nor care to use chopsticks. >> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Maybe it should be "I do not use nor do I care to use > chopsticks". Yes, that's much better than my suggestion. Reading it over, I think I ought to have written "I do not use or care to use chopsticks." What do you think? -Aaron J. Dinkin Dr. Whom > >> > And I do not nor care to use chopsticks. > >> Something about the syntax of this sentence makes my head hurt. I think > >> the "nor" is trying to join two objects of different kinds - a modal > >> auxiliary ("do not") and an ordinary verb ("care to"). I would have > >> written "I do not use nor care to use chopsticks." > > If I think about that long enough, it starts to have a > > problem with parallelism. > > Maybe it should be "I do not use nor do I care to use > > chopsticks". > Yes, that's much better than my suggestion. Reading it over, I think I > ought to have written "I do not use or care to use chopsticks." What do > you think? Sounds good to me, but I'm real easy to get along with. > > > I come across two terms recently. > > > [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > packed together in the same jar: Smuckers Goober Grape peanut butter and > grape jelly. Which, IMHO, is revolting. Tastes nothing like the do-it-yourself variety. Izzy > I come across two terms recently. > > First, parlor trick: [From the Chambers Dictionary (2003)] parlour tricks: minor social acccomplishments; performances intended to impress. > Second, peanut butter and jelly. (sounds like a tongue twister) > I wonder it is one thing called "peanut butter and jelly." > Or two things called "peanut butter" and "jelly." Two things ("peanut butter" and "jelly") both used in one thing ("a peanut butter and jelly sandwich"). SignatureMartin Ambuhl In our last episode, <brkark$3g7$1@news.ethome.net.tw>, the lovely and talented Jeremy Chen broadcast on alt.usage.english: > I come across two terms recently. > First, parlor trick: > It's very difficult to know the exact meaning of it since there is too many > information online. > Could anyone give my a lucid definition? A parlor trick is a small amusement that requires little or no equipment or preparation that can be performed in the parlor for the entertainment of guests. Parlor tricks might include card tricks or sleight of hand, such as making a coin appear from behind a child's ear or moving a small object on a table without touching it. Most parlor tricks can be done by persons with no training and only a little practice, and of course, once you know the secret of the trick, the trick is not impressive at all. Thus, in metaphor, a parlor trick is something that seems impressive at first but really represents nothing of significance. > Second, peanut butter and jelly. (sounds like a tongue twister) > I wonder it is one thing called "peanut butter and jelly." > Or two things called "peanut butter" and "jelly." > Or three things called "peanut", "butter", and "jelly." Peanuts are known as ground nuts in many places in the world. Peanut butter is made of crushed peanuts, usually with salt, sugar, and fat added. So, peanut butter is one substance. Jelly is fruit juice with added sugar and thickening agents (the exact definition of jelly and its distinction from jam is a topic frequently discussed here). So jelly is a second substance. To make a peanut butter and jelly sandwich, you would open a jar of peanut butter and spread peanut butter on one slice of bread, open a jar of jelly and spread jelly on another slice of bread, and then put the slices of bread together. (There are a few novelty products in which a ribbon of jelly is distributed throughout a jar of peanut butter.) Peanut butter and jelly are thought to go so well together and are so frequently associated that they are often spoken of as if they were one thing -- as is common with other frequently associated foods: "Peanut butter and jelly *is* all I had to make sandwiches with." SignatureLars Eighner -finger for geek code- eighner@io.com http://www.io.com/~eighner/ Brevity is the soul of lingerie. --Dorothy Parker > In our last episode, > <brkark$3g7$1@news.ethome.net.tw>, [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > > "Peanut butter and jelly *is* all I had to make sandwiches with." Peanut butter is also available in a natural form (no salt, no sugar, and no other vegetable oils added), and is not "hydrogenated" or homogenized. I get the "natural+salt" type. The unhydrogenated peanut butter separates into its nut paste and oil parts. The price, despite the lack of processing, tends to be higher than that of the sweetened, hydrogenated kind because there may be a shortened shelf life (no additives, colors, etc.) and a replacement of the natural, high-grade peanut oil by less expensive vegetable oils, ranging from canola to palm oil. The replacement of the peanut oil by other oils was done as long ago as WWII. I can recall the cooks in our institutional kitchen opening large cans of a very solid peanut butter paste, and mixing corn oil into it to make the concoction spreadable. The flavor was still very good. I wonder about the comparative prices of canola, corn, palm and peanut oils nowadays. I also wonder when mothers will catch on to the evils of hydrogenation in their children's Jif and Peter Pan. |
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.