 |
 | 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 / August 2005'ing' form of 'to stymie' (& do any other vbs end in 'ie' pronounced [i]?)
'stimying', 'stymieing', 'stymying' ================================== For the 'ing' form of the verb 'to stymie', OED2 gives only 'stimying', used in a golfing context in 1857. Is 'stymieing' not more common today? It appears, for example: - on 13 Jul 2005, in the Guardian ('stymieing King's own attempt to link up with the Swedish company, SKF') (http://politics.guardian.co.uk/conservatives/story/0,9061,1527299,00.ht ml) - on 2 May 2005, in the Times ('the stymieing of Israeli-Palestinian peace talks') (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3284-1594028,00.html) - on 22 Nov 2004, in the headline of an article in the Washington Times ('Blair-Bush allegiance stymieing Tory leader') (http://www.washtimes.com/world/20041122-124931-9416r.htm) - on 5 May 2002, in a letter of the American Bar Association to the House of Delegates ('too many such requirements [...] could have the effect of stymieing appropriate and necessary rulemaking') (http://www.abanet.org/poladv/letters/107th/privacy050702attach.pdf) 'Stymying' is also used, for example: - on 29 Jan 2002, in the Financial Times ('This so-called 20:20 rule had the effect of stymying only two groups') (http://specials.ft.com/creativebusiness/jan292002/FT38TG4E0XC.html) - on 10 Jan 2002, by the BBC ('fabrication aimed at stymying efforts to secure peace') (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1753546.stm) - on 10 Apr 2001, in the record of proceedings of the Northern Ireland Assembly ('the stymying of democracy') ('http://www.niassembly.gov.uk/record/reports/010410.htm') - on 16 Nov 1992, in the Wall Street Journal ('either by stymying it altogether [...] or by dissipating the funds') (https://subscribe.wsj.com/microexamples/articlefiles/SomeDefenseSpendin gFundstoGoElsewhere.doc) A quick websearch brought up no recent instances of 'stimying' in any major newspaper. I would be interested to hear people's views on the overall picture with regard to past and current usage. Perhaps the orthographic variation is partly explained by the fact that it is so rare for an English verb to end in 'ie', pronounced [i]? Indeed are there any other verbs at all that do this? Neil  SignatureNeil Fernandez > 'stimying', 'stymieing', 'stymying' > ================================== > > For the 'ing' form of the verb 'to stymie', OED2 gives only 'stimying', > used in a golfing context in 1857. An example where the regular rules of formation break down. 'Stymie' is a noun, and not even an English noun at that- it's Scots. I can't think of any other nouns offhand that end in -ie (OK, Brie..). 'To stymie' is a regular formation from the noun (like 'to dishwasher', 'to cable' etc.), and 'stymied' LOOKS like a regular past tense- but note that the -ied already had the -ie. Extending the same would give 'stymieing' by analogy, but it looks ugly on the page, so perhaps that's where the 'stymying' form comes from. A made up example- spaghetti. Here's a verb, 'to spaghetti', as in 'the incompetent fireman spaghettied the hosepipes.' How would you form the continuous present? I bet most people would say (and write) 'Stop spaghetti-ing it!' Paul Burke Paul Burke kirjoitti: > I can't think of any other nouns offhand that end in -ie (OK, > Brie..). What?! How about Stevie, Jamie, Johnnie, and countless other first names? Signature.... Tommi Nieminen .... http://www.saunalahti.fi/~tommni/ .... Csak füvön élt a kis zebra, de most rákapott a zabra; végül is elvitték Szobra, ott oktatják szebbre-jobbra. -Devecseri Gábor- .... tommi dot nieminen at campus dot jyu dot fi .... > Paul Burke kirjoitti: > > > I can't think of any other nouns offhand that end in -ie (OK, > > Brie..). > > What?! How about Stevie, Jamie, Johnnie, and countless other first names? It's true that they are Proper Nouns but in ordinary usage they are not "nouns" they are names. >> Paul Burke kirjoitti: >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > It's true that they are Proper Nouns but in ordinary usage they are not > "nouns" they are names. So? My name is John. I don't like being called Johnnie. I wish people'd stop Johnnieing me! >> 'stimying', 'stymieing', 'stymying' >> ================================== >> >> For the 'ing' form of the verb 'to stymie', OED2 gives only 'stimying', >> used in a golfing context in 1857. >An example where the regular rules of formation break down. 'Stymie' is >a noun, and not even an English noun at that- it's Scots. I can't >think of any other nouns offhand that end in -ie (OK, Brie..). 'collie' >'To stymie' is >a regular formation from the noun (like 'to dishwasher', 'to cable' >etc.), and 'stymied' LOOKS like a regular past tense- but note that the >-ied already had the -ie. Extending the same would give 'stymieing' by >analogy, but it looks ugly on the page, so perhaps that's where the >'stymying' form comes from. An interesting take, although to my mind 'stimying' does a bad job because it could be pronounced 'stim-ying'. (Definitely not a word that a typesetter would want to hyphenate!) I'm not sure what usual rule one might try to apply. Analogy with verbs ending in 'ie' (pronounced 'aI') would give 'stimying'; analogy with 'queue' (another unusually-spelled word with a vowel-e ending, but with a different vowel, and stressed) would give 'stymieing'. >A made up example- spaghetti. Here's a verb, 'to spaghetti', as in 'the >incompetent fireman spaghettied the hosepipes.' How would you form the >continuous present? I bet most people would say (and write) 'Stop >spaghetti-ing it!' Agreed. For 'ski' OED2 gives both 'skiing' and 'ski-ing'. SignatureNeil Fernandez > > 'stimying', 'stymieing', 'stymying' > > ================================== [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > a noun, and not even an English noun at that- it's Scots. I can't think > of any other nouns offhand that end in -ie (OK, Brie..). The die is cast... >> > 'stimying', 'stymieing', 'stymying' >> > ================================== [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >The die is cast... He sat in reverie after their quickie, admiring the magpie outside his window, and the vast expanse of prairie. Adjusting his necktie, he considered lunch-- pastie, a veggie on the side, and pie-- not a wasted calorie. The tofu, that will be for her yorkie. 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 >>> > 'stimying', 'stymieing', 'stymying' >>> > ================================== [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >considered lunch-- pastie, a veggie on the side, and pie-- not a >wasted calorie. The tofu, that will be for her yorkie. OK but got any verbs ending in 'ie' pronounced [i] other than 'birdie', 'boogie', 'sortie', and 'stymie'? :) Neil SignatureNeil Fernandez >>>>I can't think >>>>of any other nouns offhand that end in -ie (OK, Brie..). [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > OK but got any verbs ending in 'ie' pronounced [i] other than 'birdie', > 'boogie', 'sortie', and 'stymie'? :) Any noun in English has the potential to be a verb. If only to make the pedants howl. Though 'to die' as in 'to perform an action like a die, to form an exterior thread upon' will probably not catch on. ('To tap- to form an interior thread in' is commonplace). Paul Burke >>>>>I can't think >>>>>of any other nouns offhand that end in -ie (OK, Brie..). [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >> OK but got any verbs ending in 'ie' pronounced [i] other than 'birdie', >> 'boogie', 'sortie', and 'stymie'? :) >Any noun in English has the potential to be a verb. If only to make the >pedants howl. Agreed. I'd be interested to hear of any others ending in 'ie' pronounced [i] that actually are used as verbs, preferably recorded as such in OED2, so that I can investigate the 'ing' forms used. Neil SignatureNeil Fernandez >>>>> I can't think >>>>> of any other nouns offhand that end in -ie (OK, Brie..). [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Any noun in English has the potential to be a verb. If only to make > the pedants howl. Verbing weirds language? SignatureJohn Briggs In sci.lang Neil Fernandez <ncf@nospam.borve.demon.co.uk> wrote: > Perhaps the orthographic variation is partly explained by the fact that > it is so rare for an English verb to end in 'ie', pronounced [i]? Indeed > are there any other verbs at all that do this? "He birdied on the 10th hole, but bogied the 11th, and caddied for the rest of the tournament. They boogied all night. The troop sortied forth." SignatureGreg Lee <greg@ling.lll.hawaii.edu> > In sci.lang Neil Fernandez <ncf@nospam.borve.demon.co.uk> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > "He birdied on the 10th hole... Yes you birdie a hole. ...but bogied the 11th... Nope you bogey the 11th. ...and caddied for the... Caddy for > rest of the tournament. They boogied all night... You boogie-woogie indeed. The troop sortied forth." They do indeed sortie. >> In sci.lang Neil Fernandez <ncf@nospam.borve.demon.co.uk> wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >...but bogied the 11th... >Nope you bogey the 11th. And on a previous occasion, 'bogeyed' it. I haven't seen 'bogied' in this meaning. >...and caddied for the... > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >They do indeed sortie. Thanks Greg and Troy. This leaves 'birdie', 'boogie', and 'sortie' as verbs ending in 'ie' pronounced [i]. OED2 gives 'birdieing' 'sortieing'/'sortying' 'boogieing'/'boogeying' so if we wanted a rule, 'use "ieing"' would do for these. Neil SignatureNeil Fernandez > "He birdied on the 10th hole, but bogied the 11th, and caddied for the > rest of the tournament. They boogied all night. The troop sortied forth." We are boogieing then sortieing out and caddieing until bogieing and stymieing happens? The common factor (apart from boogie of which I knaw nassing) is that they are all verbs formed from non- (standard)English nouns (Scots most of them). The regular derivative formation rules don't work neatly. Paul Burke >> "He birdied on the 10th hole, but bogied the 11th, and caddied for the >> rest of the tournament. They boogied all night. The troop sortied forth." > >We are boogieing then sortieing out and caddieing until bogieing and >stymieing happens? Wouldn't the word be spelled "caddying"? I would spell it thus. SignatureTony Cooper Orlando FL >>> "He birdied on the 10th hole, but bogied the 11th, and caddied for the >>> rest of the tournament. They boogied all night. The troop sortied forth." >> >>We are boogieing then sortieing out and caddieing until bogieing and >>stymieing happens? >Wouldn't the word be spelled "caddying"? I would spell it thus. OED2 gives no examples of 'caddie' used as a verb. But we still might do some birdieing, boogieing, and sortieing before the stymieing starts :-) Neil SignatureNeil Fernandez Greg Lee: >>>> "He birdied on the 10th hole, but bogied the 11th, and caddied for the >>>> rest of the tournament. They boogied all night. The troop sortied forth." Paul Burke: >>> We are boogieing then sortieing out and caddieing until bogieing and >>> stymieing happens? Tony Cooper: >> Wouldn't the word be spelled "caddying"? I would spell it thus. Neil Fernandez: > OED2 gives no examples of 'caddie' used as a verb. > > But we still might do some birdieing, boogieing, and sortieing before > the stymieing starts :-) For me: caddy (noun and verb), caddying bogie (noun, part of a train, called truck in North America) bogey (noun and verb, golf), bogeying birdie, birdieing sortie, sortieing stymie, stymieing All perfectly regular. And also for Paul's other example: spaghetti (hypothetical verb), spaghettiing SignatureMark Brader, Toronto | "Gadgetry abounded everywhere, almost all of which msb@vex.net | he could justify." -- Robert Asprin My text in this article is in the public domain. >Greg Lee: >>>>> "He birdied on the 10th hole, but bogied the 11th, and caddied for the [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > sortie, sortieing > stymie, stymieing This is like that test where you identify the object pictured that does not belong with the other objects. In this case, the item that doesn't belong is "sortie". All the rest are golf terms if you consider "bogie" a variant spelling of "bogey". I can't figure out how "stymie" would be a verb in golf context, though, or how "stymieing" would be used in golf. On the edge would be "I stymied him", but the usage would be highly questionable since the stymie is the position of the ball and not an action of the golfer. SignatureTony Cooper Orlando FL > >Greg Lee: > >>>>> "He birdied on the 10th hole, but bogied the 11th, and caddied for the [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > the stymie is the position of the ball and not an action of the > golfer. But the passive, which has no actor, is just fine: "His ball was stymied about four feet from the hole." I vote for "stymieing." Compare "ageing," "singeing," and "skiing." SignatureBob Lieblich Who golfs to a handicap of about 78 (not score -- handicap) Bob Lieblich writes: > I vote for "stymieing." Compare "ageing," "singeing," and "skiing." But "ageing" is British. SignatureMark Brader | But I think we can do better next time. (Where the Toronto | word "we" refers to [those] who do the hard work while msb@vex.net | I sit back and complain...) -- Keith Thompson > Bob Lieblich writes: > > I vote for "stymieing." Compare "ageing," "singeing," and "skiing." > > But "ageing" is British. Americans use it, too. Well, some of us do. In particular, it's standard in the American accounting profession. SignatureBob Lieblich Tell 'em, Laura > Bob Lieblich writes: > > I vote for "stymieing." Compare "ageing," "singeing," and "skiing." > > But "ageing" is British. Yeah. Americans don't age. >But "ageing" is British. Well, don't keep it a secret! Tell us where you found the fountain of youth. SignatureSteve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk >> But "ageing" is British. > > Well, don't keep it a secret! Tell us where you found the fountain of > youth. Anyhow, I don't think it is particularly British. And "aging" is better. SignatureMike. Mark Brader: >>> But "ageing" is British. Steve Hayes: >> Well, don't keep it a secret! Tell us where you found the fountain >> of youth. Wasn't it supposed to be in Florida? Mike Lyle: > Anyhow, I don't think it is particularly British. And "aging" is > better. Google says (view with monospaced font): aging ageing ratio site:uk 460,000 749,000 .614 net-wide 38,500,000 4,780,000 8.05 site:ca 614,000 71,900 8.54 site:com 11,200,000 1,110,000 10.1 site:gov 1,730,000 87,100 19.9 site:edu 5,070,000 85,400 59.4 site:us 648,000 7,900 82.0 site:mil 42,400 209 203. It certainly looks to me as though "it's British" is justified. SignatureMark Brader, Toronto | "The singular of 'data' is not 'anecdote.'" msb@vex.net | -- Jeff Goldberg My text in this article is in the public domain. > Mark Brader: >>>> But "ageing" is British. [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > It certainly looks to me as though "it's British" is justified. I said I didn't think it was "particularly" British. Your ratios don't bear me out; but I still think it's very close to wrong. Illiteracy is encouraged in the UK: it keeps powerful people in power. Rummaging. Forging. Gorging. Etc...No, make that plain "wrong". And, yes, I have got dictionaries; and I am prepared to spit myself of them. SignatureMike. > ... And, yes, I have got dictionaries... Why the "got"? >>... And, yes, I have got dictionaries... > > Why the "got"? Why not? Regards, Einde O'Callaghan > >>... And, yes, I have got dictionaries... > > > > Why the "got"? > > > Why not? Using "got" in this context is totally unnecessary and is more confusing than omitting it altogether because it could mean that he obtained (or even became) the dictionaries, rather than has them in his possession. This is a personal preference, not a grammatical no-no. > > >>... And, yes, I have got dictionaries... > > > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > This is a personal preference, not a grammatical no-no. This seems to be at the root of the British misunderstanding of American "got." Brits routinely claim that Americans say "gotten" instead of "got," or something like that, whereas "got" (preceded by the contraction 've or 's, almost never by the full form have or has) is the normal way to express possession -- "have" is a bit formal for ordinary conversation. SignaturePeter T. Daniels grammatim@att.net > > > >>... And, yes, I have got dictionaries... > > > > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > normal way to express possession -- "have" is a bit formal for ordinary > conversation. Using the un-contracted "have" was/is presumably done to convey emphasis: "And, yes, I *have* got dictionaries", where I guess the American-ish equivalent would be "... I *do* have dictionaries". Cheers Tony SignatureTony Mountifield Work: tony@softins.co.uk - http://www.softins.co.uk Play: tony@mountifield.org - http://tony.mountifield.org > > > > >>... And, yes, I have got dictionaries... > > > > > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > "And, yes, I *have* got dictionaries", where I guess the American-ish > equivalent would be "... I *do* have dictionaries". Definitely. There's an ad on the radio these days for an art-house-movie club (each month they send you an exciting new, but obscure, DVD) in which the actors obviously reading their scripts are made to say "I own that film!" and it sounds most peculiar indeed. SignaturePeter T. Daniels grammatim@att.net ("Follow-To" set to exclude sci.lang.) > > > > > >>... And, yes, I have got dictionaries... > > > > > > Why the "got"? > > > > > Why not? > > > > Using "got" in this context is totally unnecessary and is more > > > > confusing than omitting it altogether because it could mean that > > > > he obtained (or even became) the dictionaries, rather than has > > > > them in his possession. > > > > This is a personal preference, not a grammatical no-no. > > > This seems to be at the root of the British misunderstanding of American > > > "got." Brits routinely claim that Americans say "gotten" instead of > > > "got," or something like that, whereas "got" (preceded by the > > > contraction 've or 's, almost never by the full form have or has) is the > > > normal way to express possession -- "have" is a bit formal for ordinary > > > conversation. > > Using the un-contracted "have" was/is presumably done to convey emphasis: > > "And, yes, I *have* got dictionaries", where I guess the American-ish > > equivalent would be "... I *do* have dictionaries". > Definitely. > There's an ad on the radio these days for an art-house-movie club (each > month they send you an exciting new, but obscure, DVD) in which the > actors obviously reading their scripts are made to say "I own that > film!" and it sounds most peculiar indeed. It's nice that Peter T Daniels crossposts here now and then: While we engage in mundane chatter about Engllish ujsage, it's nice to be reminded that there's a group where weightier, more esoteric aspects of language science -- like "have got" vs "have" -- are discussed. > ("Follow-To" set to exclude sci.lang.) Leave it to Cunningham to make an a.s of himself not only by aping Areff, but also in the content (or rather contentlessness) of his comment. I take it Mr Mountifield is from u.c.l.e. (a new group to me), since he's obviously too sensible a gentleman to be an a.u.e. regular. > > > > > > >>... And, yes, I have got dictionaries... > [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > weightier, more esoteric aspects of language science -- like > "have got" vs "have" -- are discussed. SignaturePeter T. Daniels grammatim@att.net > > ("Follow-To" set to exclude sci.lang.) > Leave it to Cunningham to make an a.s of himself not only by aping > Areff, [...] "Aping". No way. Leave it to Daniels to be so memory impaired he doesn't remember that I was excluding sci.lang from followups a long time ago, probably long before Richard did. Daniels says uk.culture.language.english (UCLE) is new to him. It's not surprising he's decided to try to start a flame war there immediately upon discovering it. For readers in UCLE who may not be familiar with the Daniels style, please note that it's his custom to crosspost to alt.usage.english (AUE) in order to say how much he dislikes that group. Some of us in AUE wonder why he doesn't just stay away, thus making both himself and readers of AUE happier. Daniels takes pride in not knowing what Usenet is. He's apparently also ignorant of netiquette, as shown by his failure to understand that crossposting is to be kept to a minimum, and that one way to do that is to reduce the number of newsgroups in the newsgroups line while being courteous enough -- by setting followups -- to let people know where they can find a possible continuation of the discussion. He refers to reducing followups as running away and hiding. He's apparently too dumb to understand that the worst way in the world to hide is to tell everyone exactly where you're hiding. ["Followup-To:" header set to sci.lang, justified by extraordinary circumstances.] > >> > ("Follow-To" set to exclude sci.lang.) [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > from followups a long time ago, probably long before Richard > did. Yes. Although the uncouth and brutish personality of Dr. Daniels was long evident to me, it has only been recently that I have realized that he is actually a dangerous and harmful Usenet poster. It is for that reason that I try to limit crossposting between sci.lang and AUE by restricting followups to one or the other group. Unlike many Usenet kooks and trolls, Dr. Daniels is, I believe, capable of reform, capable of becoming a responsible, productive, and kind contributor to Usenet. I therefore call upon the good, responsible men (for they are all men, I believe) of sci.lang to discipline their Dr. Daniels, this newsgroup monster who has been created by their excessive tolerance, to rebuke him for his violations of Usenet norms, to shun him, if necessary, until he mends his ways. [Snip] Isn't it time you children were in bed? Signaturehttp://www.dacha.freeuk.com/aureole/20-om.htm dashed to the obvious rocks by the whirling undertides of thought > [Snip] > Isn't it time you children were in bed? Yes. Tell Pee Dirty Daniels to quit making those weird noises, so I can go to sleep. >>> ... And, yes, I have got dictionaries... >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Regards, Einde O'Callaghan I expected this. The "got" version isn't, of course, in my formal registers; but there is sometimes a faint difference between my "I have dictionaries" and "I've got dictionaries". Echoes of discussions we've had before about the BrEtc differences between "I haven't got" and "I don't have"; and "Do you have..?" and "Have you..?" SignatureMike. >>>> ... And, yes, I have got dictionaries... >>> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >we've had before about the BrEtc differences between "I haven't got" >and "I don't have"; and "Do you have..?" and "Have you..?" This sort of question harks back to the pre-Coop days during AUE's Golden Age when we frequently talked about English usage instead of bemoaning the fact we seldom do anymore. Let's look at Mike's sentence in totality rather than the snippet some have been condemning. He wrote "And, yes, I have got dictionaries; and I am prepared to spit myself of them." That last part leaves me rather cold, but his use of "got" was just right in the first part. It emphasizes the fact that he does, indeed, own some dictionaries. The simpler "I have dictionaries" has no life to it. Comments? SignatureCharles Riggs On Saturday, in article <gbv8f1d0abi6jb5jt2cl4nhpvpj6ahl8vl@4ax.com> > This sort of question harks back to the pre-Coop days during AUE's > Golden Age when we frequently talked about English usage instead of > bemoaning the fact we seldom do anymore. There's nowt wrong with Coop. > Let's look at Mike's sentence in totality rather than the snippet some > have been condemning. He wrote "And, yes, I have got dictionaries; and [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Comments? Yes; WTF did he mean by "I am prepared to spit myself of them"? Surely "with" would be preferable to "of"? SignatureBrian {Hamilton Kelly} bhk@dsl.co.uk "I don't think you're in the top class when it comes to thinking - I suspect I could wade through the depths of your mind and not wet my ankles." Peter Thomas, in <news:uk.telecom> 24-Jul-2005 > On Saturday, in article > <gbv8f1d0abi6jb5jt2cl4nhpvpj6ahl8vl@4ax.com> [...] >> Comments? > > Yes; WTF did he mean by "I am prepared to spit myself of them"? > Surely > "with" would be preferable to "of"? M. Lyle does not appear to be taking calls at the moment. It may be connected with the French "s'en cracher", to cough up (usually your liver or lights or whatever is equally vital). > > On Saturday, in article > > <gbv8f1d0abi6jb5jt2cl4nhpvpj6ahl8vl@4ax.com> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > connected with the French "s'en cracher", to cough up (usually your > liver or lights or whatever is equally vital). Resurgam. In fact I have. It's defintittily "of". Most of the time, I know whereof I speak: those who don't render account of it to themselves may amuse themselves no matter how. That me is well equal. Host! Altar! Faeces, then! SignatureMike. > > > On Saturday, in article > > > <gbv8f1d0abi6jb5jt2cl4nhpvpj6ahl8vl@4ax.com> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > themselves may amuse themselves no matter how. That me is well equal. > Host! Altar! Faeces, then! Does he talk like that a lot? Does anyone understand? SignaturePeter T. Daniels grammatim@att.net Ar an t-aonú lá déag de mí Lúnasa, scríobh Peter T. Daniels: > > > > Yes; WTF did he mean by "I am prepared to spit myself of them"? > > > > Surely "with" would be preferable to "of"? [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Does he talk like that a lot? I have no idea, but more! more! > Does anyone understand? Yes. SignatureRussian has no phoneme that corresponds directly to Germanic /h/. As a result, for a not-insignificant number of people, the Second World War involved the Soviet Union defeating Адольф Гитлер, “Adolf Gitler.” (Follow-up set to alt.usage.english only.) [in a signature file] > Russian has no phoneme that corresponds directly to > Germanic /h/. As a result, for a not-insignificant > number of people, the Second World War involved the > Soviet Union defeating [...], "Adolf Gitler." Yes, there are some amusing words to play with for that reason. Like, "Gooray for Gollywood". Because of that relationship, I once became convinced that the great chess player Garry Kasparov should really have his name translated into English as Harry Kasparov. That seemed especially possible since someone he was descended from was named Caspar. (I've read that his mother was an American; maybe her maiden name was Caspar.) I broached the idea on rec.games.chess, but got mostly indignant disagreements. One bright spot was someone's comment about a rumor that Kasparov himself had considered advocating that he be called "Harry" in English, but had decided against it. Come to think of it, I think I've read somewhere that Kasparov changed his name from Weinstein to get a name that didn't sound Jewish. Hmmm ... Waddayaknow: On a hunch, I just Googled on "all of the words" "Harry Garry Kasparov" and got "about 23,000" hits. I don't know why the people in rec.games.chess thought my suggestion was so ridiculous. By the way, in one of my Russian classes there was a lady who was a native Ukrainian speaker. She pronounced her Russian "g"s like English "h". I don't know to what extent she typified Ukrainian speakers. >> > > On Saturday, in article >> > > <gbv8f1d0abi6jb5jt2cl4nhpvpj6ahl8vl@4ax.com> [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > Does he talk like that a lot? Does anyone understand? Yes, we are pleased to say. Yes, it's Classical Anglo-Norman for "That's a yupper." > On Saturday, in article > <gbv8f1d0abi6jb5jt2cl4nhpvpj6ahl8vl@4ax.com> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > Yes; WTF did he mean by "I am prepared to spit myself of them"? "I spit me of Nastikoff" is a bad English sentence from a Russian golfer in a PG Wodehouse story. The Russian is speaking to an English golfer whom he calls Cootaboot Banks but whose name is actually Cuthbert Banks. > Surely > "with" would be preferable to "of"? > -- > Brian {Hamilton Kelly} bhk@dsl.co.uk > "I don't think you're in the top class when it comes to thinking > - I suspect I could wade through the depths of your mind and not > wet my ankles." Peter Thomas, in <news:uk.telecom> 24-Jul-2005 >Mark Brader: >>>> But "ageing" is British. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Wasn't it supposed to be in Florida? DeLeon Springs, right up the road from me, was one guess. SignatureTony Cooper Orlando FL > I can't figure out how "stymie" would be a verb in golf context, > though, or how "stymieing" would be used in golf. On the edge would > be "I stymied him", but the usage would be highly questionable since > the stymie is the position of the ball and not an action of the > golfer. Even I, immunised from golf at an early age (my Dad was a fanatic), can see that a player could be accused of deliberately causing his ball to stop between the opponent's ball and the hole (there's something additional about distance, can't remember exactly). He would be said to use stymieing as a tactic. You can't do it any more in golf, but it lives on in snooker and as a metaphor. Paul Burke >> I can't figure out how "stymie" would be a verb in golf context, >> though, or how "stymieing" would be used in golf. On the edge would [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >additional about distance, can't remember exactly). He would be said to >use stymieing as a tactic. As a long-time golfer, I would strongly disagree that the stymie can be used as a tactic. It would require precisely placing the ball between the opponent's ball and the cup more than six inches away from the opponent's ball. No golfer has that much skill chipping on to the green from a distance. If the golfer was chipping on to the green from up close, if he was skillful enough to place the ball that accurately he'd chip into the cup. The stymie as a tactic has another disadvantage: each stroke counts, and a failed stymie would increase the number of strokes. In table games like pool, billiards, and snooker, an attempt to block uses a turn, but does not affect the score or outcome. The correct part of your comment is that a player could accuse another player of using the stymie as a tactic. It wouldn't be true, but it could be part of a psychological trash-talking tactic designed to discombobulate the opponent. I once repeatedly charged another player of optical interference because of his outrageously bright lime-green slacks. He countered by charging that my backswing broke laws of nature that even practitioners of bestiality would eschew. Neither of us filed a formal complaint with the club's Ethics & Unseemly Advantage investigative committee, but it was considered. SignatureTony Cooper Orlando FL >Greg Lee: >>>>> "He birdied on the 10th hole, but bogied the 11th, and caddied for the [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > >For me: ... > birdie, birdieing > sortie, sortieing > stymie, stymieing > >All perfectly regular. ...with verbs ending in 'ie' pronounced 'aI', and most ending in 'ue', being exceptional? SignatureNeil Fernandez |
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.