Discussion:
kangaroo pouch
Add Reply
Quinn C
2021-03-29 16:26:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
"There's a kangaroo pouch full of planets out there."

Is this common slang in Australia, or is it just Wendy Zukerman being
cute, because she immediately had to follow it up with a translation for
the international audience anyway ("a lot of").
--
Quinn C
My pronouns are they/them
(or other gender-neutral ones)
Bebercito
2021-03-29 18:13:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Quinn C
"There's a kangaroo pouch full of planets out there."
Is this common slang in Australia, or is it just Wendy Zukerman being
cute, because she immediately had to follow it up with a translation for
the international audience anyway ("a lot of").
Then the spelling should be "pouchful".
Post by Quinn C
--
Quinn C
My pronouns are they/them
(or other gender-neutral ones)
Chrysi Cat
2021-03-29 20:40:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Bebercito
Post by Quinn C
"There's a kangaroo pouch full of planets out there."
Is this common slang in Australia, or is it just Wendy Zukerman being
cute, because she immediately had to follow it up with a translation for
the international audience anyway ("a lot of").
Then the spelling should be "pouchful".
Post by Quinn C
--
Quinn C
My pronouns are they/them
(or other gender-neutral ones)
Once again, M. French-as-a-first-language, since neither Peter is here
to do it:

STOP TELLING OTHER PEOPLE HOW TO WRITE THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE!

Yes, Quinn is also an international, but I think I'd go for the full
word "full" rather than the suffix "-ful" in this case myself. I
understand that an idiomatic container full of things must exist in
French and also must ALWAYS be cut down to a suffix, though, or you'd
not have thought the same applied in English.
--
Chrysi Cat
1/2 anthrocat, nearly 1/2 anthrofox, all magical
Transgoddess, quick to anger. [she/her. Misgender and die].
Call me Chrysi or call me Kat, I'll respond to either!
Peter T. Daniels
2021-03-30 13:46:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by Bebercito
Post by Quinn C
"There's a kangaroo pouch full of planets out there."
Is this common slang in Australia, or is it just Wendy Zukerman being
cute, because she immediately had to follow it up with a translation for
the international audience anyway ("a lot of").
Then the spelling should be "pouchful".
Once again, M. French-as-a-first-language, since neither Peter is here
STOP TELLING OTHER PEOPLE HOW TO WRITE THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE!
That's a teensy bit too general -- the formulation is PSTNSHTSTL.
I gave bebe... the benefit of the doubt that it's conceivable the
Australianism might work as bebe... suggests. "Pouch full" and
"pouchful" are different concepts. The former references the
container, the latter the contained.
Post by Chrysi Cat
Yes, Quinn is also an international, but I think I'd go for the full
word "full" rather than the suffix "-ful" in this case myself. I
understand that an idiomatic container full of things must exist in
French and also must ALWAYS be cut down to a suffix, though, or you'd
not have thought the same applied in English.
Or it was "logical."
Bebercito
2021-03-30 16:13:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by Bebercito
Post by Quinn C
"There's a kangaroo pouch full of planets out there."
Is this common slang in Australia, or is it just Wendy Zukerman being
cute, because she immediately had to follow it up with a translation for
the international audience anyway ("a lot of").
Then the spelling should be "pouchful".
Post by Quinn C
--
Quinn C
My pronouns are they/them
(or other gender-neutral ones)
Once again, M. French-as-a-first-language, since neither Peter is here
STOP TELLING OTHER PEOPLE HOW TO WRITE THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE!
Yes, Quinn is also an international, but I think I'd go for the full
word "full" rather than the suffix "-ful" in this case myself. I
understand that an idiomatic container full of things must exist in
French and also must ALWAYS be cut down to a suffix, though, or you'd
not have thought the same applied in English.
I can't make sense of "a pouch full of stars" as a metaphor for "a lot of".
OTOH, the combination of <noun> and -ful is quite common to designate
an amount and is productive: handful, spadeful, you name it.

A suffix denoting capacity does exist in French ("-ée", "cuiller -> cuillerée"
for "spoon -> spoonful") but it's applicable to far fewer words than is -ful
to English words, so that my remark was based on the observation of
English, not French.
Post by Chrysi Cat
--
Chrysi Cat
1/2 anthrocat, nearly 1/2 anthrofox, all magical
Transgoddess, quick to anger. [she/her. Misgender and die].
Call me Chrysi or call me Kat, I'll respond to either!
Jerry Friedman
2021-03-30 16:25:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Bebercito
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by Bebercito
Post by Quinn C
"There's a kangaroo pouch full of planets out there."
Is this common slang in Australia, or is it just Wendy Zukerman being
cute, because she immediately had to follow it up with a translation for
the international audience anyway ("a lot of").
Then the spelling should be "pouchful".
Post by Quinn C
--
Quinn C
My pronouns are they/them
(or other gender-neutral ones)
Once again, M. French-as-a-first-language, since neither Peter is here
STOP TELLING OTHER PEOPLE HOW TO WRITE THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE!
Yes, Quinn is also an international, but I think I'd go for the full
word "full" rather than the suffix "-ful" in this case myself. I
understand that an idiomatic container full of things must exist in
French and also must ALWAYS be cut down to a suffix, though, or you'd
not have thought the same applied in English.
I can't make sense of "a pouch full of stars" as a metaphor for "a lot of".
OTOH, the combination of <noun> and -ful is quite common to designate
an amount and is productive: handful, spadeful, you name it.
A suffix denoting capacity does exist in French ("-ée", "cuiller -> cuillerée"
for "spoon -> spoonful") but it's applicable to far fewer words than is -ful
to English words, so that my remark was based on the observation of
English, not French.
It would certainly be "a pouchful" for me. As Quinn says, "a kangaroo-
pouch-ful" would be awkward to write, but Zukerman wasn't writing.
--
Jerry Friedman
Quinn C
2021-03-29 22:32:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Bebercito
Post by Quinn C
"There's a kangaroo pouch full of planets out there."
Is this common slang in Australia, or is it just Wendy Zukerman being
cute, because she immediately had to follow it up with a translation for
the international audience anyway ("a lot of").
Then the spelling should be "pouchful".
Then I'd also want to go with a hyphen: kangaroo-pouchful. It becomes
rather involved.

Whichever way I think about it, it's not very convincing as a metaphor.
I just don't imagine great multitudes to be contained within a
kangaroo's pouch. There's far fewer joeys in there than your average
rabbit's litter. Is the expression maybe based on a cartoon or
something?
--
Quinn C
My pronouns are they/them
(or other gender-neutral ones)
Peter T. Daniels
2021-03-30 13:48:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Quinn C
Post by Bebercito
Post by Quinn C
"There's a kangaroo pouch full of planets out there."
Is this common slang in Australia, or is it just Wendy Zukerman being
cute, because she immediately had to follow it up with a translation for
the international audience anyway ("a lot of").
Then the spelling should be "pouchful".
Then I'd also want to go with a hyphen: kangaroo-pouchful. It becomes
rather involved.
Whichever way I think about it, it's not very convincing as a metaphor.
I just don't imagine great multitudes to be contained within a
kangaroo's pouch. There's far fewer joeys in there than your average
rabbit's litter. Is the expression maybe based on a cartoon or
something?
Some people seem not to grasp that "handful" means '5, or possibly
4, but not more or fewer'.
Anders D. Nygaard
2021-03-31 12:16:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Some people seem not to grasp that "handful" means '5, or possibly
4, but not more or fewer'.
The dictionaries I found in a short search do not agree.

Most mention something along the lines of "as much/many as the hand will
grasp", also citing examples of uncountables like coriander or soil.
Alternatives include "a small quantity or number".

None mention the restriction you state - do you have a source?

/Anders, Denmark
Tony Cooper
2021-03-31 13:13:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 14:16:11 +0200, "Anders D. Nygaard"
Post by Anders D. Nygaard
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Some people seem not to grasp that "handful" means '5, or possibly
4, but not more or fewer'.
The dictionaries I found in a short search do not agree.
Most mention something along the lines of "as much/many as the hand will
grasp", also citing examples of uncountables like coriander or soil.
Alternatives include "a small quantity or number".
None mention the restriction you state - do you have a source?
"A handful" is sometimes used to describe non-countable things.

One such, and entirely inappropriate, usage is "More than a handful is
wasted" to describe a woman with small breasts.

Before doubts are expressed on this usage, Google it.
--
Tony Cooper Orlando Florida
Peter T. Daniels
2021-03-31 14:56:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Tony Cooper
On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 14:16:11 +0200, "Anders D. Nygaard"
Post by Anders D. Nygaard
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Some people seem not to grasp that "handful" means '5, or possibly
4, but not more or fewer'.
The dictionaries I found in a short search do not agree.
Most mention something along the lines of "as much/many as the hand will
grasp", also citing examples of uncountables like coriander or soil.
Alternatives include "a small quantity or number".
None mention the restriction you state - do you have a source?
"A handful" is sometimes used to describe non-countable things.
One such, and entirely inappropriate, usage is "More than a handful is
wasted" to describe a woman with small breasts.
Before doubts are expressed on this usage, Google it.
Don't be disgusting.

Perhaps that concept is from the censored part of a Tom Lehrer song.
CDB
2021-03-31 13:53:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Anders D. Nygaard
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Some people seem not to grasp that "handful" means '5, or possibly
4, but not more or fewer'.
The dictionaries I found in a short search do not agree.
Most mention something along the lines of "as much/many as the hand
will grasp", also citing examples of uncountables like coriander or
soil. Alternatives include "a small quantity or number".
None mention the restriction you state - do you have a source?
Even if there is a source, that would still be a matter of opinion. A
handful of barley is far more than five grains; a handful of clay is
uncountable and unitary.

Peter's unsupported statement has accomplished its purpose in any case.
Peter T. Daniels
2021-03-31 15:01:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Someone seems to have deleted what the original mention of "a
handful of something" consisted of.

Keep it up, boys. Maybe there's a home for you at FoxNews. You're
really good at extracting sound bites to make the politician look
ridiculous.
Post by Anders D. Nygaard
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Some people seem not to grasp that "handful" means '5, or possibly
4, but not more or fewer'.
The dictionaries I found in a short search do not agree.
Most mention something along the lines of "as much/many as the hand
will grasp", also citing examples of uncountables like coriander or
soil. Alternatives include "a small quantity or number".
None mention the restriction you state - do you have a source?
Even if there is a source, that would still be a matter of opinion. A
handful of barley is far more than five grains; a handful of clay is
uncountable and unitary.
Peter's unsupported statement has accomplished its purpose in any case.
Which was to say that if you cram ten, say, dice into your hand,
it's more than a handful.
Peter T. Daniels
2021-03-31 14:55:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Anders D. Nygaard
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Some people seem not to grasp that "handful" means '5, or possibly
4, but not more or fewer'.
The dictionaries I found in a short search do not agree.
Most mention something along the lines of "as much/many as the hand will
grasp", also citing examples of uncountables like coriander or soil.
Alternatives include "a small quantity or number".
I can't imagine a recipe for _anything_ calling for "a handful of coriander."

You need to recognize that English distinguishes "count" from "mass"
nouns, and mention of a number precludes conceiving of a mass noun.
Obviously, a handful of something non-countable is an amount of it
that can be held in a hand.

Wait, are you one of those weirdos who use "coriander" to mean 'cilantro',
so you're talking about a bunch of green leaves?
Post by Anders D. Nygaard
None mention the restriction you state - do you have a source?
A lifetime of speaking and hearing the language?
Tony Cooper
2021-03-31 15:22:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 07:55:16 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Anders D. Nygaard
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Some people seem not to grasp that "handful" means '5, or possibly
4, but not more or fewer'.
The dictionaries I found in a short search do not agree.
Most mention something along the lines of "as much/many as the hand will
grasp", also citing examples of uncountables like coriander or soil.
Alternatives include "a small quantity or number".
I can't imagine a recipe for _anything_ calling for "a handful of coriander."
You need to recognize that English distinguishes "count" from "mass"
nouns, and mention of a number precludes conceiving of a mass noun.
Obviously, a handful of something non-countable is an amount of it
that can be held in a hand.
Wait, are you one of those weirdos who use "coriander" to mean 'cilantro',
so you're talking about a bunch of green leaves?
Post by Anders D. Nygaard
None mention the restriction you state - do you have a source?
A lifetime of speaking and hearing the language?
Not listening, though, to how it is used to mean more than 4 or 5.

A handful of seeds, bbs, M&Ms, Tic Tacs, dimes, and many other small
objects would be more than 4 or 5.

As to "more than a handful is wasted" may be "disgusting" to you, but
not all of us are disgusted by female breasts.
--
Tony Cooper Orlando Florida
Peter T. Daniels
2021-03-31 15:29:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Tony Cooper
On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 07:55:16 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Anders D. Nygaard
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Some people seem not to grasp that "handful" means '5, or possibly
4, but not more or fewer'.
The dictionaries I found in a short search do not agree.
Most mention something along the lines of "as much/many as the hand will
grasp", also citing examples of uncountables like coriander or soil.
Alternatives include "a small quantity or number".
I can't imagine a recipe for _anything_ calling for "a handful of coriander."
You need to recognize that English distinguishes "count" from "mass"
nouns, and mention of a number precludes conceiving of a mass noun.
Obviously, a handful of something non-countable is an amount of it
that can be held in a hand.
Wait, are you one of those weirdos who use "coriander" to mean 'cilantro',
so you're talking about a bunch of green leaves?
Post by Anders D. Nygaard
None mention the restriction you state - do you have a source?
A lifetime of speaking and hearing the language?
Not listening, though, to how it is used to mean more than 4 or 5.
A handful of seeds, bbs, M&Ms, Tic Tacs, dimes, and many other small
objects would be more than 4 or 5.
Why are you so incapable of considering context? The context was
the number of tiny kangaroos in a litter versus the number of bunny
rabbits in a litter. The former is a handful (or less), the latter is more
than a handful. It has nothing to do with how many you could hold
in your hand.
Post by Tony Cooper
As to "more than a handful is wasted" may be "disgusting" to you, but
not all of us are disgusted by female breasts.
I guess the Lehrer reference was wasted on you. Check out "I hold
your hand in mine, dear."
Tony Cooper
2021-03-31 16:17:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 08:29:36 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 07:55:16 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Anders D. Nygaard
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Some people seem not to grasp that "handful" means '5, or possibly
4, but not more or fewer'.
The dictionaries I found in a short search do not agree.
Most mention something along the lines of "as much/many as the hand will
grasp", also citing examples of uncountables like coriander or soil.
Alternatives include "a small quantity or number".
I can't imagine a recipe for _anything_ calling for "a handful of coriander."
You need to recognize that English distinguishes "count" from "mass"
nouns, and mention of a number precludes conceiving of a mass noun.
Obviously, a handful of something non-countable is an amount of it
that can be held in a hand.
Wait, are you one of those weirdos who use "coriander" to mean 'cilantro',
so you're talking about a bunch of green leaves?
Post by Anders D. Nygaard
None mention the restriction you state - do you have a source?
A lifetime of speaking and hearing the language?
Not listening, though, to how it is used to mean more than 4 or 5.
A handful of seeds, bbs, M&Ms, Tic Tacs, dimes, and many other small
objects would be more than 4 or 5.
Why are you so incapable of considering context? The context was
the number of tiny kangaroos in a litter versus the number of bunny
rabbits in a litter. The former is a handful (or less), the latter is more
than a handful. It has nothing to do with how many you could hold
in your hand.
You abandoned the kangaroo context when you made that statement above
"Some people seem not to grasp that "handful" means '5, or possibly 4,
but not more or fewer." You then defended the restriction by saying
it was based on a lifetime of speaking and hearing the language.

Now you want us to believe that you have a lifetime of speaking and
hearing about kangaroo and bunny litter size.

Your garden path defenses are a maze of dead-ends.
--
Tony Cooper Orlando Florida
Peter T. Daniels
2021-03-31 16:43:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Tony Cooper
On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 08:29:36 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 07:55:16 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Anders D. Nygaard
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Some people seem not to grasp that "handful" means '5, or possibly
4, but not more or fewer'.
The dictionaries I found in a short search do not agree.
Most mention something along the lines of "as much/many as the hand will
grasp", also citing examples of uncountables like coriander or soil.
Alternatives include "a small quantity or number".
I can't imagine a recipe for _anything_ calling for "a handful of coriander."
You need to recognize that English distinguishes "count" from "mass"
nouns, and mention of a number precludes conceiving of a mass noun.
Obviously, a handful of something non-countable is an amount of it
that can be held in a hand.
Wait, are you one of those weirdos who use "coriander" to mean 'cilantro',
so you're talking about a bunch of green leaves?
Post by Anders D. Nygaard
None mention the restriction you state - do you have a source?
A lifetime of speaking and hearing the language?
Not listening, though, to how it is used to mean more than 4 or 5.
A handful of seeds, bbs, M&Ms, Tic Tacs, dimes, and many other small
objects would be more than 4 or 5.
Why are you so incapable of considering context? The context was
the number of tiny kangaroos in a litter versus the number of bunny
rabbits in a litter. The former is a handful (or less), the latter is more
than a handful. It has nothing to do with how many you could hold
in your hand.
You abandoned the kangaroo context when you made that statement above
"Some people seem not to grasp that "handful" means '5, or possibly 4,
but not more or fewer." You then defended the restriction by saying
it was based on a lifetime of speaking and hearing the language.
Now you want us to believe that you have a lifetime of speaking and
hearing about kangaroo and bunny litter size.
Your garden path defenses are a maze of dead-ends.
Are you really so ignorant as to not know the word "context"? The
"five or four" note is nowhere _but_ in the message about the newborns.

You're the only one who chose to start a fight about it.

Grow up.
Kerr-Mudd,John
2021-03-31 21:13:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Tony Cooper
On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 08:29:36 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 07:55:16 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Anders D. Nygaard
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Some people seem not to grasp that "handful" means '5, or
possibly 4, but not more or fewer'.
The dictionaries I found in a short search do not agree.
Most mention something along the lines of "as much/many as the
hand will grasp", also citing examples of uncountables like
coriander or soil. Alternatives include "a small quantity or
number".
I can't imagine a recipe for _anything_ calling for "a handful of
coriander." You need to recognize that English distinguishes
"count" from "mass" nouns, and mention of a number precludes
conceiving of a mass noun. Obviously, a handful of something
non-countable is an amount of it that can be held in a hand.
Wait, are you one of those weirdos who use "coriander" to mean
'cilantro', so you're talking about a bunch of green leaves?
Post by Anders D. Nygaard
None mention the restriction you state - do you have a source?
A lifetime of speaking and hearing the language?
Not listening, though, to how it is used to mean more than 4 or 5.
A handful of seeds, bbs, M&Ms, Tic Tacs, dimes, and many other small
objects would be more than 4 or 5.
Why are you so incapable of considering context? The context was
the number of tiny kangaroos in a litter versus the number of bunny
rabbits in a litter. The former is a handful (or less), the latter is
more than a handful. It has nothing to do with how many you could hold
in your hand.
You abandoned the kangaroo context when you made that statement above
"Some people seem not to grasp that "handful" means '5, or possibly 4,
but not more or fewer." You then defended the restriction by saying
it was based on a lifetime of speaking and hearing the language.
Now you want us to believe that you have a lifetime of speaking and
hearing about kangaroo and bunny litter size.
Your garden path defenses are a maze of dead-ends.
"Truly these are the goalposts of ... what? where'd he go?"
--
Bah, and indeed, Humbug.
Anders D. Nygaard
2021-04-01 20:54:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Anders D. Nygaard
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Some people seem not to grasp that "handful" means '5, or possibly
4, but not more or fewer'.
The dictionaries I found in a short search do not agree.
Most mention something along the lines of "as much/many as the hand will
grasp", also citing examples of uncountables like coriander or soil.
Alternatives include "a small quantity or number".
I can't imagine a recipe for _anything_ calling for "a handful of coriander."
You need to recognize that English distinguishes "count" from "mass"
nouns, and mention of a number precludes conceiving of a mass noun.
Obviously, a handful of something non-countable is an amount of it
that can be held in a hand.
I'm quite aware of the distinction between "count" and "mass". Note that
I wrote "also".
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Wait, are you one of those weirdos who use "coriander" to mean 'cilantro',
so you're talking about a bunch of green leaves?
I'm just quoting what I found.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Anders D. Nygaard
None mention the restriction you state - do you have a source?
A lifetime of speaking and hearing the language?
Sounds like a "no". I'll continue to go by the dictionaries, then.

/Anders, Denmark.
Peter T. Daniels
2021-04-02 14:05:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Anders D. Nygaard
I'll continue to go by the dictionaries, then.
Then you will continue to misunderstand the language "as she is spoke."

That is, obviously, a general statement. Dictionaries are retrospective,
not prospective; and dictionaries cannot deal with all the subtleties
and nuances of speech. They are not ultimate authorities, nor even
authorities at all.
Anders D. Nygaard
2021-04-03 15:18:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
[... restoring snipped context ...]
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Some people seem not to grasp that "handful" means '5, or possibly
4, but not more or fewer'.
The dictionaries I found in a short search do not agree. [...]
None mention the restriction you state - do you have a source?
A lifetime of speaking and hearing the language?
[Sounds like a "no".] I'll continue to go by the dictionaries, then.
Then you will continue to misunderstand the language "as she is spoke."
Not according to other, native English-speaking, respondents, who do not
recognize your restriction.
That is, obviously, a general statement. Dictionaries are retrospective,
not prospective; and dictionaries cannot deal with all the subtleties
and nuances of speech. They are not ultimate authorities, nor even
authorities at all.
Perhaps not, but neither are you.

/Anders, Denmark

Peter Duncanson [BrE]
2021-03-31 14:34:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 30 Mar 2021 06:48:13 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Quinn C
Post by Bebercito
Post by Quinn C
"There's a kangaroo pouch full of planets out there."
Is this common slang in Australia, or is it just Wendy Zukerman being
cute, because she immediately had to follow it up with a translation for
the international audience anyway ("a lot of").
Then the spelling should be "pouchful".
Then I'd also want to go with a hyphen: kangaroo-pouchful. It becomes
rather involved.
Whichever way I think about it, it's not very convincing as a metaphor.
I just don't imagine great multitudes to be contained within a
kangaroo's pouch. There's far fewer joeys in there than your average
rabbit's litter. Is the expression maybe based on a cartoon or
something?
Some people seem not to grasp that "handful" means '5, or possibly
4, but not more or fewer'.
Some people may use it with that exact meaning. However, Oxford's Lexico
says:

https://www.lexico.com/definition/handful

handful

noun (handfuls)

1 A quantity that fills the hand.
‘ a small handful of fresh coriander’

1.1 A small number or amount.
‘only a handful of people were in the pub’

2 informal A person or group that is very difficult to deal with or
control.
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
Rich Ulrich
2021-04-01 04:43:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 15:34:25 +0100, "Peter Duncanson [BrE]"
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
On Tue, 30 Mar 2021 06:48:13 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Quinn C
Post by Bebercito
Post by Quinn C
"There's a kangaroo pouch full of planets out there."
Is this common slang in Australia, or is it just Wendy Zukerman being
cute, because she immediately had to follow it up with a translation for
the international audience anyway ("a lot of").
Then the spelling should be "pouchful".
Then I'd also want to go with a hyphen: kangaroo-pouchful. It becomes
rather involved.
Whichever way I think about it, it's not very convincing as a metaphor.
I just don't imagine great multitudes to be contained within a
kangaroo's pouch. There's far fewer joeys in there than your average
rabbit's litter. Is the expression maybe based on a cartoon or
something?
Some people seem not to grasp that "handful" means '5, or possibly
4, but not more or fewer'.
Some people may use it with that exact meaning.
I guess I would use "handful" for 4 or 5 if I said that someone
had had a handful of opportunities. I could even say, "more than
a handful" -- to imply that I couldn't count them on the fingers
of just one hand.

Something that can be held in the hand could be any number.
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
However, Oxford's Lexico
https://www.lexico.com/definition/handful
handful
noun (handfuls)
1 A quantity that fills the hand.
‘ a small handful of fresh coriander’
1.1 A small number or amount.
‘only a handful of people were in the pub’
2 informal A person or group that is very difficult to deal with or
control.
--
Rich Ulrich
Peter T. Daniels
2021-04-01 13:31:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich Ulrich
On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 15:34:25 +0100, "Peter Duncanson [BrE]"
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
On Tue, 30 Mar 2021 06:48:13 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Quinn C
Post by Bebercito
Post by Quinn C
"There's a kangaroo pouch full of planets out there."
Is this common slang in Australia, or is it just Wendy Zukerman being
cute, because she immediately had to follow it up with a translation for
the international audience anyway ("a lot of").
Then the spelling should be "pouchful".
Then I'd also want to go with a hyphen: kangaroo-pouchful. It becomes
rather involved.
Whichever way I think about it, it's not very convincing as a metaphor.
I just don't imagine great multitudes to be contained within a
kangaroo's pouch. There's far fewer joeys in there than your average
rabbit's litter. Is the expression maybe based on a cartoon or
something?
Some people seem not to grasp that "handful" means '5, or possibly
4, but not more or fewer'.
Some people may use it with that exact meaning.
I guess I would use "handful" for 4 or 5 if I said that someone
had had a handful of opportunities. I could even say, "more than
a handful" -- to imply that I couldn't count them on the fingers
of just one hand.
Something that can be held in the hand could be any number.
No one seems to have noticed my grammatical point about the
_original_ quotation.

"A pouch full" describes the container. "A pouchful" describes the
contained.
Commander Kinsey
2021-04-01 18:10:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Bebercito
Post by Quinn C
"There's a kangaroo pouch full of planets out there."
Is this common slang in Australia, or is it just Wendy Zukerman be=
ing
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Bebercito
Post by Quinn C
cute, because she immediately had to follow it up with a translati=
on for
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Bebercito
Post by Quinn C
the international audience anyway ("a lot of").
Then the spelling should be "pouchful".
Then I'd also want to go with a hyphen: kangaroo-pouchful. It becomes=
rather involved.
Whichever way I think about it, it's not very convincing as a metapho=
r.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
I just don't imagine great multitudes to be contained within a
kangaroo's pouch. There's far fewer joeys in there than your average
rabbit's litter. Is the expression maybe based on a cartoon or
something?
Some people seem not to grasp that "handful" means '5, or possibly
4, but not more or fewer'.
Is the number 10 fewer than the number 12? Numbers are countable after =
all....
Quinn C
2021-03-30 17:14:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Quinn C
Whichever way I think about it, it's not very convincing as a metaphor.
I just don't imagine great multitudes to be contained within a
kangaroo's pouch. There's far fewer joeys in there than your average
rabbit's litter. Is the expression maybe based on a cartoon or
something?
When I searched "kangaroo pouch full of" online, one of the first hits
was this:

| Doraemon is an ear-less robot cat from the future with a kangaroo
| pouch full of wonderful gadgets.

Now here it is probably not an expression of measure. Doraemon actually
has a pouch in his[1] belly where he can store any number of objects of
any size. To explain this, it's said to be 4th-dimensional.



That's the kind of cartoon I had in mind.

____
[1] In English, "he" seems to be used. I don't know if Doraemon is
gendered in Japanese.
--
Quinn C
My pronouns are they/them
(or other gender-neutral ones)
Peter T. Daniels
2021-03-30 21:16:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Quinn C
Post by Quinn C
Whichever way I think about it, it's not very convincing as a metaphor.
I just don't imagine great multitudes to be contained within a
kangaroo's pouch. There's far fewer joeys in there than your average
rabbit's litter. Is the expression maybe based on a cartoon or
something?
When I searched "kangaroo pouch full of" online, one of the first hits
| Doraemon is an ear-less robot cat from the future with a kangaroo
| pouch full of wonderful gadgets.
Now here it is probably not an expression of measure. Doraemon actually
has a pouch in his[1] belly where he can store any number of objects of
any size. To explain this, it's said to be 4th-dimensional.
http://youtu.be/8MLtMhyDs-4
That's the kind of cartoon I had in mind.
____
[1] In English, "he" seems to be used. I don't know if Doraemon is
gendered in Japanese.
A seahorse-type pouch rather than a marsupial-type pouch.
Ross Clark
2021-03-29 23:21:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Quinn C
"There's a kangaroo pouch full of planets out there."
Is this common slang in Australia, or is it just Wendy Zukerman being
cute, because she immediately had to follow it up with a translation for
the international audience anyway ("a lot of").
Pending word from Peter M, I'll put my money on made-up.
I've never heard it, and there's nothing like it in any of several
sources on AusEng that I've looked at.
Peter Moylan
2021-03-30 01:18:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Quinn C
"There's a kangaroo pouch full of planets out there."
Is this common slang in Australia, or is it just Wendy Zukerman
being cute, because she immediately had to follow it up with a
translation for the international audience anyway ("a lot of").
Pending word from Peter M, I'll put my money on made-up. I've never
heard it, and there's nothing like it in any of several sources on
AusEng that I've looked at.
I understood it, but I've never heard it before.
--
Peter Moylan Newcastle, NSW http://www.pmoylan.org
Loading...