Re: More "divided by a common language" stuff
Posted: Tue Jan 21, 2020 4:32 pm
OK, never mind German (das Auto)... blame Chuck Berry!Nanohedron wrote:I can't imagine what German would have to do with it.
http://forums.chiffandfipple.com/
http://forums.chiffandfipple.com/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=107953
OK, never mind German (das Auto)... blame Chuck Berry!Nanohedron wrote:I can't imagine what German would have to do with it.
For a moment there you had me at a loss. Chuck Berry's use of "automobile" was for lyrical purposes, so of course that changes things. Otherwise it has pretty limited use; it's not colloquial. We don't normally use "auto", either, except in combination: auto parts, auto mechanic, auto racing, auto insurance. And we're just as likely to say "car" instead. If I said, "We'll take my automobile," people would think I was even more of a relic than I already am.Peter Duggan wrote:... blame Chuck Berry!
It's that too.Peter Duggan wrote:... you'd tell me that was part of a train or something like that.
This is the edition. It's from 2016. I am absolutely convinced that it is not an edition meant for school purposes, though M. Grant Kellermeyer may well think he is publishing an academic look at the subject. The review is interesting.Nanohedron wrote:Don't make the mistake, Ben, of concluding that your edition must be an example of what is broadly to be deemed "American". True, it is aimed at the US reader, but I'm entirely sure that the edition was intended for schoolreading; I can't imagine any other reason for such a ridiculous degree of micromanaging. It might surprise some people, but even in the US we presume that the average adult reader is not going to be a total boob who needs their hand held at every turn; in the normal run of things, if the reader doesn't know where Hampshire is, they can look it up on their own steam. The penny-kisser would also point out that fewer footnotes means less cost, so your copy would clearly be scholastic material, or at least for the youth market (although I can't imagine what would inspire an average youngster to electively read Algernon Blackwood). Let me reassure you that "ramshackle" is still current yet among Yanks whose lives extend beyond our animal interests, and this reinforces my conviction about the edition's purpose. True, some grownups might not know the word - such are the times - but it's hardly to be put on the same dusty shelf as "poltophagy". So I would suggest, Ben, that you take the edition for what it evidently is: not a representative example of American publishing, but a sourcebook geared toward our educational system. What level I couldn't hope to guess, but that knowledge might be revealing. What is the date of the edition?
That wasn't you, was it?I have tried several times to read a few of the tales, but reading the stories is such a huge effort that I have put it aside and will likely not attempt to read it again. Why? Because this specific edition is annotated by an M. Grant Kellermeyer, and the annotations are endless, unnecessary, didactic, distracting, and are as prevalent as the punctuation.. except far far more distracting and annoying. That someone-- anyone-- would feel the need to "explain" a word in nearly every other sentence is simply ludicrous. If my comments seem disparaging, then I've succeeded.
Yes. I've never anything quite this bad before. By the way, it wasn't my review that you saw. I am very tempted, however, to post my own.Nanohedron wrote:Close reading renders a service in opening up a world that might not otherwise have been guessed at. But in the case of Ben's book, it sounds too overdone to be worthwhile.
Illustrations and all, too! Must be his magnum opus: "Look, Ma! I know Britisher stuff like 'Cambridge' and 'ramshackle'."benhall.1 wrote:Having read a bit further into the book, I am now fully persuaded that it's not to do with different cultural norms, or language, on either side of the pond, but rather that yer man Kellermeyer is a bit of a plonker.
Good, uh?Nanohedron wrote:I had to look up "plonker", you know. A footnote would have been helpful.
I think that's not a bad idea. Since you have exactly the same objections, they would help allay any perception that the negative review might be spurious. The uncritically glowing reports need some seasoning, IMHO.benhall.1 wrote:By the way, it wasn't my review that you saw. I am very tempted, however, to post my own.
'Torch' is a contraction of 'electric torch'. We have moved on so here here now have 'torches' and 'flaming torches'. Invite people to a torchlight procession and most would bring their flashlights, or these days be festooned with LED Xmas tree lights.Nanohedron wrote:I've become pretty comfortable hearing most British usages, but "torch" for "flashlight" still catches me off-balance.
All right, for fancy parades "torchlight" applies here too, and it's the only exception I can think of - only instead of flashlights, the parade's outfitters would supply its performing members with, for instance, purpose-built thematic batons with a light on the end so as to emulate a flaming torch. I'm sure there are variants that also get billed as torchlight parades: processions of glowing orbs, rods, hoops, or other doodads would be possible. So "torch" would only be a generalized poetic metaphor, because in application an orb remains an orb; out of convenience an end-lit baton might still be called a torch, but only on the basis of it roughly resembling an old-school one, and it's easier to say. A mob with common glowsticks seems a bit like cheating, though, if the word "torchlight" is to apply. I think the lights-festooned also fall under the torchlight parade category nowadays, but to be honest, I'm a bit out of the loop: I can't remember the last time I attended a parade, never mind one at night (and those are crowning events in at least a couple of our local festivals); even if I got free stuff out of it, I confess that parades generally bore me and make me want to be off doing something else.david_h wrote:Invite people to a torchlight procession and most would bring their flashlights, or these days be festooned with LED Xmas tree lights.
I honestly cant remember any. But I last went when I was a youth; the pints and the years have dimmed my memory. I must go again before it gets banned.Nanohedron wrote:It does look like bloody good fun. Given the proximity to real estate, I trust there's a bucket brigade on hand?