Discussion:
How to write for your reader's English
(too old to reply)
Steve Hayes
2019-03-21 04:36:46 UTC
Permalink
How to Write for Your Reader’s English

Your English, my English. Where you were born, raised, educated, and
live will dictate which of the Englishes you write and speak. What if
you’re writing for a reader who uses one of the other Englishes? How
do you write for your reader’s English?

When you get to the robot, you turn left. You’ll see the restaurant on
your right. Watch out for the taxis! I’ll come just now, then we’ll
have a cooldrink.

As a South African living in a community of expats from all over, I
quickly learned that people didn’t always understand what I was
talking about. South African English looks like English, sounds like
English, is English … but sometimes it seems like it’s from another
planet. Incidentally, a “robot” is a traffic light; “taxis” normally
refer to minibuses used as a form of public transport and their
drivers are notoriously reckless; “just now” indicates some vague
point in the future; and a “cooldrink” is a soft drink, a soda or pop.
The Wonder and Challenge of English

This is the wonderful thing about English: wherever it’s spoken, it
develops its own unique form. It’s not only about “harbour” versus
“harbor,” but about the words and phrases you won’t find anywhere
else.

This is also the difficulty of English. I constantly have to
“translate” from my English to the English of the person I’m speaking
to so that they understand me. When you’re writing your book, you’ll
want to be sure to write for your reader’s English, or at least write
so that they understand what you’re saying.
The Englishes

I like to use the term “the Englishes”: US English, UK English,
Canadian English, Australian English, and so on. In fiction, writers
often use words and phrases unique to the area the story is set in. It
adds local flavour. To avoid confusion, they may explain the word or
phrase in a footnote or in a glossary at the end of the book. But is
this a good idea for nonfiction?

The simple answer is, it depends. If you’re writing for a local
market, the Englishes are really a non-issue. You simply need to write
in the form of English spoken in that market. For example, if you’re
writing a book for the Canadian market, you’ll use Canadian English.
Straight forward.

But what if you’re writing for an international market? What if you
want to release your book in various countries, each with their own
variety of English? Then how you write for your reader’s English is a
little more problematic.

How do you write in such a way that everyone will understand you? How
do you avoid misunderstandings, such as the fact that a 'thong' in
most countries is a style of underwear but in Australia, the US, and
parts of Canada it’s a care-free summer sandal often called a
flip-flop? Both fit in the technical definition, as does a narrow
strip of leather, but the common usage differs depending on where you
are.
Adding Color/Colour and Meaning

In narrative nonfiction, you might want to add some colour by letting
your characters speak their unique forms of English. Some writers
simply explain the meanings of words by using brackets.

For example:

In the town of Humpty Doo I met a man who taught me Australia’s most
famous song. He sang, “Once a jolly swagman (a transient labourer
travelling from farm to farm looking for work) camped by a billabong
(oxbow lake) under the shade of a coolibah tree (a type of eucalyptus
tree).”

?Clearly, this isn’t the best way to do it, since using brackets
breaks the flow of the sentence.

Instead, as with fiction, you can use footnotes or a glossary to
explain the terms if their meaning isn’t clear from the context.
Better yet, you can explain the terms in the non-dialogue parts of
your writing.

In the town of Humpty Doo I met a man who taught me Australia’s most
famous song. He sang, “Once a jolly swagman camped by a billabong
under the shade of a coolibah tree.” I learned that a swagman used to
be a transient labourer travelling from farm to farm looking for work,
that a billabong was an oxbow lake and that a coolibah tree was a type
of eucalyptus tree.

?The reader immediately gets an explanation of what the song lyrics
mean, without having to take a break in their reading to first refer
to a footnote or glossary.

Writing for an international market? It takes care to write for your
reader’s English #theenglishes #writeforyourreader #amwriting #iartg
Click to Tweet
Choosing to Go Neutral

If you’re not using much dialogue in your writing, though, you might
want to choose a more neutral form of English. Avoid slang and
regional expressions. Instead, opt for more generally-known terms.

Instead of using the Australian “barbie” or the South African “braai”,
use the more well-known “barbecue,” for example. Instead of saying
I'll “knock you up," which while innocuous in the UK means to
impregnate in Canada and the US, opt for the more generic "wake you
up." ?

Luckily, in our increasingly interconnected world, some regional terms
are universally understood. Most people know that what the British
call aubergines, for instance, are what is known elsewhere as
eggplants. Except in India and South Africa, where they’re called
brinjals!
Be Aware of Differing Sensitivities

If you want to write for your reader’s English it will also help you
immensely if you become more familiar with the different Englishes. Be
aware that not everyone attaches the same meaning to a certain word.
If you’re mindful of this, you can avoid misunderstandings or even
causing offence.

If I’m writing about South Africa’s ethnic groups, for instance, I’ll
always explain right from the start that the term “Coloured” refers to
someone who is either of mixed racial ancestry, a descendant of the
Khoisan people or a descendant of slaves brought from the East Indies
some three centuries ago. I do this because I know that in the United
States, the word is considered offensive when describing a person.
Spelling, Punctuation, Grammar

Another aspect of the Englishes that you might be aware of is that
there are subtle differences in spelling, punctuation and grammar.
This is the issue of “colour” or “color,” whether to put the comma
before or after the quotation marks, whether to say “my family are” or
“my family is,” and so on. When you’re writing, you only need to pay
attention to these differences if you’re writing for a specific local
market.
Write For Your Reader’s English

If you’re writing for an international market, and you’re unsure how
to best write for your reader’s English, simply write in the style you
feel most comfortable with. The differences are so subtle that most
people won’t even notice.
About the Author Linell van Hoepen

Linell van Hoepen has been working with words for most of her
professional life. Editing, proofreading, ghostwriting, translating:
she’s done it all. Having worked as a publicist and later as a
freelancer in the publishing industry in her native South Africa,
she’s written everything from press releases to textbooks. These days
she lives with two dogs and a cat, between a volcano and a lake in
Guatemala. Naturally, she still works with words.

https://ingeniumbooks.com/how-to-write-for-your-readers-english/
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
Anton Shepelev
2019-03-21 09:39:12 UTC
Permalink
Most people know that what the British call
aubergines, for instance, are what is known else-
where as eggplants.
what *are* known as eggplants, maybe?
--
() ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail
/\ http://preview.tinyurl.com/qcy6mjc [archived]
s***@gmail.com
2019-03-21 20:03:45 UTC
Permalink
And he's forgotten about introducing clips and explaining
what struck him about the quotation.
We do find out the author, eventually,
but this seems a rather wholesale cuttenpaist.
Post by Anton Shepelev
Most people know that what the British call
aubergines, for instance, are what is known else-
where as eggplants.
what *are* known as eggplants, maybe?
I would probably use the plural, but there is an element of mass-ness
to "what is known elsewhere" that might argue that the singular is ok.

/dps
Steve Hayes
2019-03-22 14:42:10 UTC
Permalink
Long time poor signal-noise ratio.
Post by Anton Shepelev
Most people know that what the British call aubergines, for
instance, are what is known else-
where as eggplants.
what *are* known as eggplants, maybe?
Maybe, but its referring to an expression. So you might thing that the
expression are eggplants.

BTW: I've left my typo above intact, because there have been occasional
discussions about how "another think coming" became "another thing
coming".
--
Steve Hayes http://khanya.wordpress.com
Anton Shepelev
2019-03-22 20:34:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anton Shepelev
Most people know that what the British call
aubergines, for instance, are what is known
elsewhere as eggplants.
what *are* known as eggplants, maybe?
Maybe, but its referring to an expression. So you
might thing that the expression are eggplants.
How is it possible? If one will parse the quoted
sentence according to the English syntax, one is
bound to conclude that the instances of "what" can
stand for nothing else than the vegetables called
aubergines and eggplants.
BTW: I've left my typo above intact, because there
have been occasional discussions about how "anoth-
er think coming" became "another thing coming".
"think" is so weird as a verb that I prefer the mod-
ern distortion. But "thing" is even more weid as a
verb.
--
() ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\ http://preview.tinyurl.com/qcy6mjc [archived]
Madhu
2019-03-23 18:19:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve Hayes
Post by Anton Shepelev
Most people know that what the British call aubergines, for
instance, are what is known elsewhere as eggplants.
what *are* known as eggplants, maybe?
Maybe, but its referring to an expression. So you might thing that
the expression are eggplants.
How is it possible? If one will parse the quoted sentence according
to the English syntax, one is bound to conclude that the instances of
"what" can stand for nothing else than the vegetables called
aubergines and eggplants.
It is the same single vegetable which is variously called aubergines,
eggplants and brinjals.
Post by Steve Hayes
BTW: I've left my typo above intact
Steve Hayes
2019-03-26 05:03:25 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 23:34:31 +0300, Anton Shepelev
Post by Anton Shepelev
Post by Steve Hayes
BTW: I've left my typo above intact, because there
have been occasional discussions about how "anoth-
er think coming" became "another thing coming".
"think" is so weird as a verb that I prefer the mod-
ern distortion. But "thing" is even more weid as a
verb.
You mean a noun, Shirley?
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
Peter Moylan
2019-03-26 12:55:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve Hayes
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 23:34:31 +0300, Anton Shepelev
Post by Anton Shepelev
Post by Steve Hayes
BTW: I've left my typo above intact, because there
have been occasional discussions about how "anoth-
er think coming" became "another thing coming".
"think" is so weird as a verb that I prefer the mod-
ern distortion. But "thing" is even more weid as a
verb.
You mean a noun, Shirley?
I'll have to have a think about that.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Anton Shepelev
2019-03-26 21:10:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve Hayes
"think" is so weird as a verb [Ant: noun] that I
prefer the modern distortion. But "thing" is
even more weid as a verb.
You mean a noun, Shirley?
Yes, Shirley & Lee, and Michelson & Morley.
--
() ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\ http://preview.tinyurl.com/qcy6mjc [archived]
Anton Shepelev
2019-03-22 21:08:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve Hayes
As a South African living in a community of expats
from all over,
From all over what? Are such dangling prepositions
another feature of South-African English?
Post by Steve Hayes
I quickly learned that people didn't always under-
stand what I was talking about. South African En-
glish looks like English, sounds like English, is
English... but sometimes it seems like it's from
another planet. Incidentally, a "robot" is a
traffic light; "taxis" normally refer to minibuses
used as a form of public transport and their
drivers are notoriously reckless;
These used to be rampant in Russia too, on their
raggedy "Gazelle" minivans:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GAZelle

until the municipal transport networks ordered and
organised the business. Now they supplement the
large busses rather than compete with them. The
Russian term for them may be rendered in English as
route-bound taxi, but in my opinion mini-bus is much
better.
Post by Steve Hayes
"just now" indicates some vague point in the fu-
ture;
Now this one is totally illogical. Dialectically,
the wide spread of English has turned out its bane,
because foreign cultures cruelly force it into the
Procrustian beds of their native tongues.
--
() ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\ http://preview.tinyurl.com/qcy6mjc [archived]
Quinn C
2019-03-22 21:23:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anton Shepelev
Post by Steve Hayes
As a South African living in a community of expats
from all over,
From all over what? Are such dangling prepositions
another feature of South-African English?
No, the adverb "all over" is used ... pretty much all over.

<https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/all_over>
| 2 /informal/ Everywhere
--
But I have nver chosen my human environment. I have always
borrowed it from someone like you or Monk or Doris.
-- Jane Rule, This Is Not For You, p.152
Peter Duncanson [BrE]
2019-03-22 23:00:21 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 17:23:51 -0400, Quinn C
Post by Quinn C
Post by Anton Shepelev
Post by Steve Hayes
As a South African living in a community of expats
from all over,
From all over what? Are such dangling prepositions
another feature of South-African English?
No, the adverb "all over" is used ... pretty much all over.
<https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/all_over>
| 2 /informal/ Everywhere
The OED definition with the earliest two quotations. Note the spelling
"alouer" for "all over":

2.a. Over the whole extent of something; in every part; everywhere.
Also: over one's whole body; in every limb.

c1440 (??a1400) Morte Arthure l. 2027 (MED) This ryche
mane..Dresses vp dredfully the dragone of golde, With egles
alouer.
c1440 Prose Life Alexander (Thornton) (1913) 81 (MED) Faire
feldes, alouer floresched wit flores.
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.english.usage)
Stefan Ram
2019-03-22 23:16:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
The OED definition with the earliest two quotations. Note the spelling
2.a. Over the whole extent of something; in every part; everywhere.
Also: over one's whole body; in every limb.
So, what is the meaning of those lyrics by Bob Dylan:

Well, if I had to do it all over again,
Babe, I’d do it all over you.

? A machine translation gives:

If I had to do it again,
I'd do it with you.
Peter Moylan
2019-03-26 13:10:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stefan Ram
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
The OED definition with the earliest two quotations. Note the spelling
2.a. Over the whole extent of something; in every part; everywhere.
Also: over one's whole body; in every limb.
Well, if I had to do it all over again,
Babe, I’d do it all over you.
One of my favourite Dylan songs, but strangely many Dylan fans have
never heard of it.

It's a deliberate word play. The title "All over you" makes you expect
something different.

The first line simply means "If I had to live my life again". If you do
something all over again, it just means that you're repeating what you
have just done.

If the second line were "I'd do it all over with you", as the first line
leads you to expect, then that line would simply mean "I'd want to spend
my life with you". But that's not what Dylan wrote. In his version "I'd
do it all over you" means "I would shit on you".

"Well, a dog's got his bone in the alley
A cat, she has nine lives
A millionaire's got a million dollars
King Saud's got nine hundred wives.
Everyone's got something
That they're looking forward to.
I'm looking forward to doing it all again
'Cause Babe, I'd do it all over you."

It's a bugger to sing, though, because you have to strum the chords G,
F#, F in quick succession, requiring rapid shifts in the left hand. Any
slight lapse of concentration leads to muffled chords.
Post by Stefan Ram
If I had to do it again,
I'd do it with you.
That would be the same machine that produced "The vodka is agreeable,
but the meat has gone bad".
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Ken Blake
2019-03-26 15:44:54 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 27 Mar 2019 00:10:09 +1100, Peter Moylan
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Stefan Ram
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
The OED definition with the earliest two quotations. Note the spelling
2.a. Over the whole extent of something; in every part; everywhere.
Also: over one's whole body; in every limb.
Well, if I had to do it all over again,
Babe, I’d do it all over you.
One of my favourite Dylan songs, but strangely many Dylan fans have
never heard of it.
It's a deliberate word play. The title "All over you" makes you expect
something different.
The first line simply means "If I had to live my life again". If you do
something all over again, it just means that you're repeating what you
have just done.
If the second line were "I'd do it all over with you", as the first line
leads you to expect, then that line would simply mean "I'd want to spend
my life with you". But that's not what Dylan wrote. In his version "I'd
do it all over you" means "I would shit on you".
"Well, a dog's got his bone in the alley
A cat, she has nine lives
A millionaire's got a million dollars
King Saud's got nine hundred wives.
Everyone's got something
That they're looking forward to.
I'm looking forward to doing it all again
'Cause Babe, I'd do it all over you."
It's a bugger to sing, though, because you have to strum the chords G,
F#, F in quick succession, requiring rapid shifts in the left hand. Any
slight lapse of concentration leads to muffled chords.
I don't know the song, but playing G, F#, F in quick succession seems
very easy to me. Assuming that you play the G chord barred on the
third fret, each successive chord is just a one-fret downward shift.
Peter Moylan
2019-03-27 01:47:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ken Blake
On Wed, 27 Mar 2019 00:10:09 +1100, Peter Moylan
Post by Peter Moylan
It's a bugger to sing, though, because you have to strum the
chords G, F#, F in quick succession, requiring rapid shifts in the
left hand. Any slight lapse of concentration leads to muffled
chords.
I don't know the song, but playing G, F#, F in quick succession seems
very easy to me. Assuming that you play the G chord barred on the
third fret, each successive chord is just a one-fret downward shift.
Maybe it's just me. I can do that shift if given enough time (I can play
"Blackbird", for example), but it's a struggle if you have to fit the
sequence of three chords into about half a second, each time pressing
the barre finger on the fretboard firmly enough to make all notes clear.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Ken Blake
2019-03-27 15:44:59 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 27 Mar 2019 12:47:18 +1100, Peter Moylan
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Ken Blake
On Wed, 27 Mar 2019 00:10:09 +1100, Peter Moylan
Post by Peter Moylan
It's a bugger to sing, though, because you have to strum the
chords G, F#, F in quick succession, requiring rapid shifts in the
left hand. Any slight lapse of concentration leads to muffled
chords.
I don't know the song, but playing G, F#, F in quick succession seems
very easy to me. Assuming that you play the G chord barred on the
third fret, each successive chord is just a one-fret downward shift.
Maybe it's just me. I can do that shift if given enough time (I can play
"Blackbird", for example), but it's a struggle if you have to fit the
sequence of three chords into about half a second, each time pressing
the barre finger on the fretboard firmly enough to make all notes clear.
We're all different, I guess. To me it would be a lot harder if the
shape of the chord changed.

I just started working on playing the guitar version of the Albeniz
"Asturias." The hardest part to me is the series of shifts, beginning
in measure 25, to a seventh-position B major chord (the same shape as
the third-position G major chord above). It's not hard to get there;
it's hard to get there quickly enough.
Peter Moylan
2019-03-27 16:17:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ken Blake
On Wed, 27 Mar 2019 12:47:18 +1100, Peter Moylan
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Ken Blake
On Wed, 27 Mar 2019 00:10:09 +1100, Peter Moylan
Post by Peter Moylan
It's a bugger to sing, though, because you have to strum the
chords G, F#, F in quick succession, requiring rapid shifts in
the left hand. Any slight lapse of concentration leads to
muffled chords.
I don't know the song, but playing G, F#, F in quick succession
seems very easy to me. Assuming that you play the G chord barred
on the third fret, each successive chord is just a one-fret
downward shift.
Maybe it's just me. I can do that shift if given enough time (I can
play "Blackbird", for example), but it's a struggle if you have to
fit the sequence of three chords into about half a second, each
time pressing the barre finger on the fretboard firmly enough to
make all notes clear.
We're all different, I guess. To me it would be a lot harder if the
shape of the chord changed.
I just started working on playing the guitar version of the Albeniz
"Asturias." The hardest part to me is the series of shifts,
beginning in measure 25, to a seventh-position B major chord (the
same shape as the third-position G major chord above). It's not hard
to get there; it's hard to get there quickly enough.
I recognise a fellow guitar player, then. And what we have in common is
the problem of "quickly enough". I guess we could all play brilliantly
if we could just be allowed to slow down.

( I haven't tried anything by Albeniz, so you're probably ahead of me
there. The closest I've come is "L'agrima" by ... sorry, mental block.)

At present I'm trying to relearn Leonard Cohen's "Suzanne". It would be
easy if it weren't for the fact that he changes from 4/4 time to 6/4
time in the middle of a verse, and he does it differently in each of the
three verses. Technically I can do it, but the problem is to sing the
words without having the instrumental part collapse.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
John Dunlop
2019-03-27 17:44:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Moylan
( I haven't tried anything by Albeniz, so you're probably ahead of me
there. The closest I've come is "L'agrima" by ... sorry, mental block.)
Francisco Tárrega.

I like the companion piece "Adelita", and it's only slightly more
challenging.
--
John
Ken Blake
2019-03-27 19:44:43 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 27 Mar 2019 17:44:49 +0000, John Dunlop
Post by John Dunlop
Post by Peter Moylan
( I haven't tried anything by Albeniz, so you're probably ahead of me
there. The closest I've come is "L'agrima" by ... sorry, mental block.)
Francisco Tárrega.
I like the companion piece "Adelita", and it's only slightly more
challenging.
Right. Two of his easiest pieces. The difficulty of what he wrote
varies enormously--from Lagrima and Adelita to Gran Jota and
Variations on The Carnival of Venice
Ken Blake
2019-03-27 19:40:20 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 28 Mar 2019 03:17:46 +1100, Peter Moylan
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Ken Blake
On Wed, 27 Mar 2019 12:47:18 +1100, Peter Moylan
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Ken Blake
On Wed, 27 Mar 2019 00:10:09 +1100, Peter Moylan
Post by Peter Moylan
It's a bugger to sing, though, because you have to strum the
chords G, F#, F in quick succession, requiring rapid shifts in
the left hand. Any slight lapse of concentration leads to
muffled chords.
I don't know the song, but playing G, F#, F in quick succession
seems very easy to me. Assuming that you play the G chord barred
on the third fret, each successive chord is just a one-fret
downward shift.
Maybe it's just me. I can do that shift if given enough time (I can
play "Blackbird", for example), but it's a struggle if you have to
fit the sequence of three chords into about half a second, each
time pressing the barre finger on the fretboard firmly enough to
make all notes clear.
We're all different, I guess. To me it would be a lot harder if the
shape of the chord changed.
I just started working on playing the guitar version of the Albeniz
"Asturias." The hardest part to me is the series of shifts,
beginning in measure 25, to a seventh-position B major chord (the
same shape as the third-position G major chord above). It's not hard
to get there; it's hard to get there quickly enough.
I recognise a fellow guitar player, then. And what we have in common is
the problem of "quickly enough". I guess we could all play brilliantly
if we could just be allowed to slow down.
I can generally play "Asturias" quickly enough. My major problem is
the gap in time while leaping up to the 7th position chord. My teacher
suggested a couple of things to help with that, but I haven't had
enough time to practice them much yet.

Just before starting with "Asturias," I was working on Tárrega's
"Recuerdos de la Alhambra" (perhaps the most well-known of all
classical guitar pieces). It's all tremolos. It's not hard to play,
but it's hard to play the tremolos quickly enough.
Post by Peter Moylan
( I haven't tried anything by Albeniz, so you're probably ahead of me
there. The closest I've come is "L'agrima" by ... sorry, mental block.)
Tárrega. And it's Lagrima, without the apostrophe. It's one of his
easier pieces. I play that too. Tárrega is my favorite guitar
composer. I play a few other pieces of his too--Adelita, Capricho
Arabe, Marieta.
Post by Peter Moylan
At present I'm trying to relearn Leonard Cohen's "Suzanne". It would be
easy if it weren't for the fact that he changes from 4/4 time to 6/4
time in the middle of a verse, and he does it differently in each of the
three verses. Technically I can do it, but the problem is to sing the
words without having the instrumental part collapse.
I don't sing and I know next to nothing of popular music, so I don't
know "Suzanne." I've heard of Leonard Cohen, but I wouldn't recognize
anything he wrote.

Changing from 4/4 time to 6/4 time doesn't sound hard to me, as long
as you think of the 6/4 being duple time, not triple time. It's like
changing from 4/4 to 2/4 (with the 2/4 being two triplets). One Two
Three Four / Deedledee Deedledee.
Peter Moylan
2019-03-28 01:30:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ken Blake
Just before starting with "Asturias," I was working on Tárrega's
"Recuerdos de la Alhambra" (perhaps the most well-known of all
classical guitar pieces). It's all tremolos. It's not hard to play,
but it's hard to play the tremolos quickly enough.
For some value of "not hard". I can play Recuerdos at about one tenth of
the correct speed. I've given up hope of ever being able to play it
properly.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Ken Blake
2019-03-28 16:59:08 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 28 Mar 2019 12:30:17 +1100, Peter Moylan
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Ken Blake
Just before starting with "Asturias," I was working on Tárrega's
"Recuerdos de la Alhambra" (perhaps the most well-known of all
classical guitar pieces). It's all tremolos. It's not hard to play,
but it's hard to play the tremolos quickly enough.
For some value of "not hard". I can play Recuerdos at about one tenth of
the correct speed. I've given up hope of ever being able to play it
properly.
My teacher says I am just a little bit too slow. I just need more
practice. But since I just started working on Asturias, I now spend
almost no time on Recuerdos.

That's a standard problem for me. When I reach a certain level of
skill on a piece, I move on to another piece, and that means I stop
practicing the previous one.

I wish that every day I would practice all the pieces I've ever
played, and get better at them all. But I have nowhere near enough
time.
John Dunlop
2019-03-28 08:19:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ken Blake
Tárrega. And it's Lagrima, without the apostrophe. It's one of his
easier pieces. I play that too. Tárrega is my favorite guitar
composer. I play a few other pieces of his too--Adelita, Capricho
Arabe, Marieta.
with a certain passage from his "Gran Vals" under your fingers, you can
wow your audience with a spot of "call & response" if someone's phone
goes off in the middle of your recital.
--
John
Ken Blake
2019-03-28 17:00:33 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 28 Mar 2019 08:19:34 +0000, John Dunlop
Post by John Dunlop
Post by Ken Blake
Tárrega. And it's Lagrima, without the apostrophe. It's one of his
easier pieces. I play that too. Tárrega is my favorite guitar
composer. I play a few other pieces of his too--Adelita, Capricho
Arabe, Marieta.
with a certain passage from his "Gran Vals" under your fingers, you can
wow your audience with a spot of "call & response" if someone's phone
goes off in the middle of your recital.
No recitals for me. I'm strictly an amateur, and play only for myself.
Peter Moylan
2019-03-28 11:54:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ken Blake
Post by Peter Moylan
( I haven't tried anything by Albeniz, so you're probably ahead of me
there. The closest I've come is "L'agrima" by ... sorry, mental block.)
Tárrega. And it's Lagrima, without the apostrophe. It's one of his
easier pieces. I play that too. Tárrega is my favorite guitar
composer. I play a few other pieces of his too--Adelita, Capricho
Arabe, Marieta.
Sorry about the apostrophe. It should have been Lágrima.

That was hypercorrection on my part. The sheet music I have for that
piece incorrectly turns the stress mark into an apostrophe, so the
information I have in my head is that the title has to be written the
opposite way of how it is written ... if you see what I mean, which I
admit is not very clear.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Peter Moylan
2019-03-28 12:08:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ken Blake
On Thu, 28 Mar 2019 03:17:46 +1100, Peter Moylan
Post by Peter Moylan
At present I'm trying to relearn Leonard Cohen's "Suzanne". It
would be easy if it weren't for the fact that he changes from 4/4
time to 6/4 time in the middle of a verse, and he does it
differently in each of the three verses. Technically I can do it,
but the problem is to sing the words without having the
instrumental part collapse.
I don't sing and I know next to nothing of popular music, so I don't
know "Suzanne." I've heard of Leonard Cohen, but I wouldn't
recognize anything he wrote.
The big challenge with popular music is being able to sing at the same
time as playing, given that what you're playing is usually rather
different from a straight melody. You can get the playing to the point
of sounding flawless, and then it all falls apart as soon as you start
singing. In fact you can't sing until you've reached the point where
your fingers are doing the playing without any conscious input from your
brain.

My guitar teacher insists that you haven't really learnt to play a piece
until you can hold a conversation while playing it.

Singers usually resolve this by strumming the guitar rather than
finger-picking, but I find that boring.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Jerry Friedman
2019-03-28 12:37:25 UTC
Permalink
On Thursday, March 28, 2019 at 6:08:32 AM UTC-6, Peter Moylan wrote:

[guitar]
Post by Peter Moylan
The big challenge with popular music
and lute songs by Dowland and others, I assume
Post by Peter Moylan
is being able to sing at the same
time as playing, given that what you're playing is usually rather
different from a straight melody. You can get the playing to the point
of sounding flawless, and then it all falls apart as soon as you start
singing. In fact you can't sing until you've reached the point where
your fingers are doing the playing without any conscious input from your
brain.
My guitar teacher insists that you haven't really learnt to play a piece
until you can hold a conversation while playing it.
Singers usually resolve this by strumming the guitar rather than
finger-picking, but I find that boring.
They probably find the singing interesting.
--
Jerry Friedman wishes he could play the guitar. Or sing.
Peter Moylan
2019-03-28 13:57:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Friedman
[guitar]
Post by Peter Moylan
The big challenge with popular music
and lute songs by Dowland and others, I assume
Yes, certainly. I'd probably also find it hard to sing while playing
piano, if I was able to play piano. The difficulty lies in trying to do
two things at the same time.
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Peter Moylan
is being able to sing at the same
time as playing, given that what you're playing is usually rather
different from a straight melody. You can get the playing to the point
of sounding flawless, and then it all falls apart as soon as you start
singing. In fact you can't sing until you've reached the point where
your fingers are doing the playing without any conscious input from your
brain.
My guitar teacher insists that you haven't really learnt to play a piece
until you can hold a conversation while playing it.
Singers usually resolve this by strumming the guitar rather than
finger-picking, but I find that boring.
They probably find the singing interesting.
Perhaps I chose the wrong word there. The sing+strum combination
accounts for a huge amount of successful popular music, so it must be
interesting to audiences. What I really meant was "unchallenging".
Post by Jerry Friedman
--
Jerry Friedman wishes he could play the guitar. Or sing.
I sing a lot of Leonard Cohen songs, partly because I like the songs and
partly because his music is a good match to my level of guitar-playing
competence. In addition, Cohen shares with Bob Dylan the quality of not
having a particularly good singing voice, but getting away with it
anyway by being a good songwriter. As a corollary, if you sing their
songs then people will overlook a lot of failures in your singing ability.

If you really would like to take up an instrument of that kind, I'd
suggest a ukelele. It sounds as good as a guitar, but is easier to learn
by having only 2/3 as many strings. I've never tried to play one myself,
but reports from friends suggest that you can get up to speed quickly on
a ukelele.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
RH Draney
2019-03-23 07:57:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 17:23:51 -0400, Quinn C
Post by Quinn C
Post by Anton Shepelev
Post by Steve Hayes
As a South African living in a community of expats
from all over,
From all over what? Are such dangling prepositions
another feature of South-African English?
No, the adverb "all over" is used ... pretty much all over.
<https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/all_over>
| 2 /informal/ Everywhere
The OED definition with the earliest two quotations. Note the spelling
2.a. Over the whole extent of something; in every part; everywhere.
Also: over one's whole body; in every limb.
c1440 (??a1400) Morte Arthure l. 2027 (MED) This ryche
mane..Dresses vp dredfully the dragone of golde, With egles
alouer.
c1440 Prose Life Alexander (Thornton) (1913) 81 (MED) Faire
feldes, alouer floresched wit flores.
Scarecrow: "They took my arm and they threw it over there! And then
they took my legs and threw them over there!"

Tin Man: "That's you all over."

....r
Anton Shepelev
2019-03-24 13:48:49 UTC
Permalink
As a South African living in a community of
expats from all over,
From all over what? Are such dangling preposi-
tions another feature of South-African English?
No, the adverb "all over" is used ... pretty much
all over.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/all_over
| 2 /informal/ Everywhere
It is my unjustified, uneducated, but experienced
and strong opinion that the adverb "all over" must
be traceable, in one way or another, to a noun oc-
curing previously in the same sentece. The connec-
tion may go through a verb for which that noun is
the subject or through an adjective modifying that
noun:

1. The [room] is dirty all over.

2. That's [him] all over.

3. This ryche mane..Dresses vp dredfully the
[dragone] of golde, With egles alouer.

4. Faire [feldes], alouer floresched wit flores.

It cannot play the role of a noun, which it seems to
in Steve's phrase "a community of expats from all
over." I think that is a new and informal usage,
whereas my rule describes one that is old and liter-
ary.
--
() ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\ http://preview.tinyurl.com/qcy6mjc [archived]
Peter T. Daniels
2019-03-24 14:16:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anton Shepelev
As a South African living in a community of
expats from all over,
From all over what? Are such dangling preposi-
tions another feature of South-African English?
No, the adverb "all over" is used ... pretty much
all over.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/all_over
| 2 /informal/ Everywhere
It is my unjustified, uneducated, but experienced
and strong opinion that the adverb "all over" must
be traceable, in one way or another, to a noun oc-
curing previously in the same sentece. The connec-
tion may go through a verb for which that noun is
the subject or through an adjective modifying that
1. The [room] is dirty all over.
2. That's [him] all over.
3. This ryche mane..Dresses vp dredfully the
[dragone] of golde, With egles alouer.
4. Faire [feldes], alouer floresched wit flores.
It cannot play the role of a noun, which it seems to
in Steve's phrase "a community of expats from all
over." I think that is a new and informal usage,
whereas my rule describes one that is old and liter-
ary.
You are, as so often, wrong. If it turned out that Ambrose Bierce used
the phrase in the ordinary way, would you believe that it's normal
Standard English?
Anton Shepelev
2019-03-24 19:39:46 UTC
Permalink
[Cross-post reinstated after Peter's post through GG]
Post by Peter T. Daniels
It is my unjustified, uneducated, but experi-
enced and strong opinion that the adverb "all
over" must be traceable, in one way or another,
to a noun occuring previously in the same sen-
tece. The connection may go through a verb for
which that noun is the subject or through an ad-
1. The [room] is dirty all over.
2. That's [him] all over.
3. This ryche mane..Dresses vp dredfully the
[dragone] of golde, With egles alouer.
4. Faire [feldes], alouer floresched wit flo-
res.
It cannot play the role of a noun, which it
seems to in Steve's phrase "a community of ex-
pats from all over." I think that is a new and
informal usage, whereas my rule describes one
that is old and literary.
You are, as so often, wrong. If it turned out that
Ambrose Bierce used the phrase in the ordinary
way, would you believe that it's normal Standard
English?
No, because everybody may err or blunder. What,
pray tell, is the ordinary usage of "all over" if
not the one quoted?
--
() ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\ http://preview.tinyurl.com/qcy6mjc [archived]
Peter T. Daniels
2019-03-25 02:11:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anton Shepelev
[Cross-post reinstated after Peter's post through GG]
[did not write the following]
Post by Anton Shepelev
Post by Peter T. Daniels
It is my unjustified, uneducated, but experi-
enced and strong opinion that the adverb "all
over" must be traceable, in one way or another,
to a noun occuring previously in the same sen-
tece. The connection may go through a verb for
which that noun is the subject or through an ad-
1. The [room] is dirty all over.
2. That's [him] all over.
3. This ryche mane..Dresses vp dredfully the
[dragone] of golde, With egles alouer.
4. Faire [feldes], alouer floresched wit flo-
res.
It cannot play the role of a noun, which it
seems to in Steve's phrase "a community of ex-
pats from all over." I think that is a new and
informal usage, whereas my rule describes one
that is old and literary.
You are, as so often, wrong. If it turned out that
Ambrose Bierce used the phrase in the ordinary
way, would you believe that it's normal Standard
English?
No, because everybody may err or blunder. What,
pray tell, is the ordinary usage of "all over" if
not the one quoted?
The one that you so irrationally hate.
Anton Shepelev
2019-03-24 16:16:02 UTC
Permalink
[duplicate post to restore the groups Madrigal
dropped in his reply throught GG]
"From all over" was originally American, according
to the OED, which cites examples back to
1860 'E. Wetherell' & 'A. Lothrop' /Say & Seal/ II. xxxvii. 422
They came from all over; the country was gleaned.
(Despite the apparent meter, that's prose.)
That was my first thought after Madrigal's correc-
tion: a typical American abuse of "over":

There were sunbeams in plenty of the literal kind
abroad; it was a perfect day; and everybody was
glad of that, though some people remarked it
would have made no difference if it had rained
cannon-balls. Never did Pattaquasset see such a
coming to church! never in the remembrance of Mr.
Somers. They came from all over; the country was
gleaned; and many a fire was raked up on the
hearthstone that day which most Sundays got leave
to burn and somebody to watch it.

(http://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/28545/pg28545-images.html)

Ambrose Bierce wrote about it:

Over for About, In, or Concerning. "Don't cry
over spilt milk." "He rejoiced over his acquit-
tal."

Over for More than. "A sum of over ten thousand
dollars." "Upward of ten thousand dollars" is
equally objectionable.

Over for On. "The policeman struck him over the
head." If the blow was over the head it did not
hit him.

I feel no dislike for "from all around". Is it also
correct in the context of "Say & Seal"?
--
() ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\ http://preview.tinyurl.com/qcy6mjc [archived]
Peter T. Daniels
2019-03-24 16:49:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anton Shepelev
[duplicate post to restore the groups Madrigal
dropped in his reply throught GG]
What groups are those? Are you inviting yet more spam into this newsgroup?
Not posted to AUE
Post by Anton Shepelev
"From all over" was originally American, according
to the OED, which cites examples back to
1860 'E. Wetherell' & 'A. Lothrop' /Say & Seal/ II. xxxvii. 422
They came from all over; the country was gleaned.
(Despite the apparent meter, that's prose.)
That was my first thought after Madrigal's correc-
What do you know about "typical American" anything? You decided, long ago,
that Ambrose Bierce was the _ne plus ultra_ of American literature, so your
authority in the matter is nonexistent.
Post by Anton Shepelev
There were sunbeams in plenty of the literal kind
abroad; it was a perfect day; and everybody was
glad of that, though some people remarked it
would have made no difference if it had rained
cannon-balls. Never did Pattaquasset see such a
coming to church! never in the remembrance of Mr.
Somers. They came from all over; the country was
gleaned; and many a fire was raked up on the
hearthstone that day which most Sundays got leave
to burn and somebody to watch it.
(http://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/28545/pg28545-images.html)
Not in anything you've quoted here.
Post by Anton Shepelev
Over for About, In, or Concerning. "Don't cry
over spilt milk." "He rejoiced over his acquit-
tal."
Strange-sounding outside the adage. Does not need to be included in such a list.
Post by Anton Shepelev
Over for More than. "A sum of over ten thousand
dollars." "Upward of ten thousand dollars" is
equally objectionable.
Both are fine.
Post by Anton Shepelev
Over for On. "The policeman struck him over the
head." If the blow was over the head it did not
hit him.
Possibly Irish? Certainly old-fashioned if not entirely obsolete.
Post by Anton Shepelev
I feel no dislike for "from all around". Is it also
correct in the context of "Say & Seal"?
Why are you inventing that new phrase, and what is "'Say and Seal'"?
CDB
2019-03-24 16:45:11 UTC
Permalink
As a South African living in a community of expats from all
over,
From all over what? Are such dangling preposi- tions another
feature of South-African English?
No, the adverb "all over" is used ... pretty much all over.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/all_over | 2
/informal/ Everywhere
It is my unjustified, uneducated, but experienced and strong
opinion that the adverb "all over" must be traceable, in one way or
another, to a noun oc- curing previously in the same sentece.
The connec- tion may go through a verb for which that noun is the
1. The [room] is dirty all over.
2. That's [him] all over.
3. This ryche mane..Dresses vp dredfully the [dragone] of
golde, With egles alouer.
4. Faire [feldes], alouer floresched wit flores.
That is an interesting approach. I will keep my eyes open for other
occurrences of the expression, and test them against it.
It cannot play the role of a noun, which it seems to in Steve's
phrase "a community of expats from all over." I think that is
a new and informal usage, whereas my rule describes one that is old
and liter- ary.
Perhaps the unexpressed noun here is "the world", faintly suggested by
the notion of countries introduced by "expats".
Anton Shepelev
2019-03-24 19:21:33 UTC
Permalink
It is my unjustified, uneducated, but experi-
enced and strong opinion that the adverb "all
over" must be traceable, in one way or another,
to a noun occuring previously in the same sen-
tece. The connection may go through a verb for
which that noun is the subject or through an ad-
That is an interesting approach. I will keep my
eyes open for other occurrences of the expression,
and test them against it.
Consider it an adverb werewolfed from a preposition
but retaining its craving for a noun. The differ-
ence from "all around", which I mentioned elsewere
in the thread, is obvious: in "all around" 'all'
means everything, whereas in "all over" it is an in-
ternal adverb modifying (and emphasizing) 'over'.
Perhaps the unexpressed noun here is "the world",
faintly suggested by the notion of countries in-
troduced by "expats".
which turns "all over" back into a preposition.
--
() ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\ http://preview.tinyurl.com/qcy6mjc [archived]
Peter T. Daniels
2019-03-24 19:29:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anton Shepelev
It is my unjustified, uneducated, but experi-
enced and strong opinion that the adverb "all
over" must be traceable, in one way or another,
to a noun occuring previously in the same sen-
tece. The connection may go through a verb for
which that noun is the subject or through an ad-
That is an interesting approach. I will keep my
eyes open for other occurrences of the expression,
and test them against it.
Consider it an adverb werewolfed from a preposition
but retaining its craving for a noun. The differ-
ence from "all around", which I mentioned elsewere
in the thread, is obvious: in "all around" 'all'
means everything, whereas in "all over" it is an in-
ternal adverb modifying (and emphasizing) 'over'.
More bullshit, now piling Latin interpretations of English into the mix.

The technical term for your "werewolfed" is "conversion," and it was a
favorite device of one William Shakespeare. But since Shakespeare wasn't
Bierce, I suppose you don't consider him a valid model for English usage.
Post by Anton Shepelev
Perhaps the unexpressed noun here is "the world",
faintly suggested by the notion of countries in-
troduced by "expats".
which turns "all over" back into a preposition.
There is no "unexpressed noun."

"All over" is a spatial expression. ("Adverb" has no, or infinite, meaning
in English grammar).
Quinn C
2019-03-25 17:42:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anton Shepelev
It is my unjustified, uneducated, but experi-
enced and strong opinion that the adverb "all
over" must be traceable, in one way or another,
to a noun occuring previously in the same sen-
tece. The connection may go through a verb for
which that noun is the subject or through an ad-
That is an interesting approach. I will keep my
eyes open for other occurrences of the expression,
and test them against it.
Consider it an adverb werewolfed from a preposition
but retaining its craving for a noun. The differ-
ence from "all around", which I mentioned elsewere
in the thread, is obvious: in "all around" 'all'
means everything, whereas in "all over" it is an in-
ternal adverb modifying (and emphasizing) 'over'.
Perhaps the unexpressed noun here is "the world",
faintly suggested by the notion of countries in-
troduced by "expats".
which turns "all over" back into a preposition.
Depending on the context, it could be all over town, all over the
country, all over the world, all over the place ...

"All around" I would understand as limited to a certain distance. In
the case of expats, neighboring countries - maybe not only direct
neighbors, but also the countries one over (another abuse?). But not
from all around the world.
--
for (Bell bell : bells) { bell.ring() }
// one rule to ring them all
CDB
2019-03-25 17:55:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Quinn C
It is my unjustified, uneducated, but experi- enced and
strong opinion that the adverb "all over" must be
traceable, in one way or another, to a noun occuring previously
in the same sen- tece. The connection may go through a verb
for which that noun is the subject or through an ad- jective
That is an interesting approach. I will keep my eyes open for
other occurrences of the expression, and test them against it.
Consider it an adverb werewolfed from a preposition but retaining
its craving for a noun. The differ- ence from "all around",
which I mentioned elsewere in the thread, is obvious: in "all
around" 'all' means everything, whereas in "all over" it is an
in- ternal adverb modifying (and emphasizing) 'over'.
Perhaps the unexpressed noun here is "the world", faintly
suggested by the notion of countries in- troduced by "expats".
which turns "all over" back into a preposition.
Depending on the context, it could be all over town, all over the
country, all over the world, all over the place ...
Yes, the unexpressed noun leaves some leeway, but the point for Anton's
purposes is that there should be some sort of potential object of
"over". "World" was just an example, although I think the right one for
the sample sentence.
Post by Quinn C
"All around" I would understand as limited to a certain distance. In
the case of expats, neighboring countries - maybe not only direct
neighbors, but also the countries one over (another abuse?). But not
from all around the world.
As I read the phrase "a community of ex-pats from all over", it can
include people from anywhere in the world. I wonder if you're
interpreting it as "people from everywhere in the world", which does
seem less likely.
Steve Hayes
2019-03-26 05:12:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by CDB
Post by Quinn C
"All around" I would understand as limited to a certain distance. In
the case of expats, neighboring countries - maybe not only direct
neighbors, but also the countries one over (another abuse?). But not
from all around the world.
As I read the phrase "a community of ex-pats from all over", it can
include people from anywhere in the world. I wonder if you're
interpreting it as "people from everywhere in the world", which does
seem less likely.
"All over" sounds quite OK to me.

What I would question about that is the use of the word "community" in
that context.

Though it has become increasingly common to refer to people who share
a common characteristic as a "community", I think it devalues the word
"community" unless those people also interact with each other.

Ex-pats from all over have nothing in common other than the fact that
they happen, for the moment, to be in a country other than their own.

I'm not sure if that usage of "community" is peculiarly South African.
I think I have seen it elsewhere as well.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
CDB
2019-03-26 12:39:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve Hayes
Post by CDB
Post by Quinn C
"All around" I would understand as limited to a certain distance.
In the case of expats, neighboring countries - maybe not only
direct neighbors, but also the countries one over (another
abuse?). But not from all around the world.
As I read the phrase "a community of ex-pats from all over", it
can include people from anywhere in the world. I wonder if you're
interpreting it as "people from everywhere in the world", which
does seem less likely.
"All over" sounds quite OK to me.
Yes; it's an idiom. The interesting question I think Anton was
addressing is the origin of the idiom, the plain, descriptive use of
those words that later came slightly unstuck from reality.
Post by Steve Hayes
What I would question about that is the use of the word "community"
in that context.
Though it has become increasingly common to refer to people who
share a common characteristic as a "community", I think it devalues
the word "community" unless those people also interact with each
other.
Ex-pats from all over have nothing in common other than the fact
that they happen, for the moment, to be in a country other than their
own.
I'm not sure if that usage of "community" is peculiarly South
African. I think I have seen it elsewhere as well.
I think the idea was that they had become a community.
Quinn C
2019-03-26 12:50:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve Hayes
Post by CDB
Post by Quinn C
"All around" I would understand as limited to a certain distance. In
the case of expats, neighboring countries - maybe not only direct
neighbors, but also the countries one over (another abuse?). But not
from all around the world.
As I read the phrase "a community of ex-pats from all over", it can
include people from anywhere in the world. I wonder if you're
interpreting it as "people from everywhere in the world", which does
seem less likely.
"All over" sounds quite OK to me.
What I would question about that is the use of the word "community" in
that context.
Though it has become increasingly common to refer to people who share
a common characteristic as a "community", I think it devalues the word
"community" unless those people also interact with each other.
Ex-pats from all over have nothing in common other than the fact that
they happen, for the moment, to be in a country other than their own.
I'm not sure if that usage of "community" is peculiarly South African.
I think I have seen it elsewhere as well.
Seems common to me. It's often meant to imply that they have certain
common interests, socially or politically - in the case of expats, for
example, regarding immigration or the status and rights of foreigners.
Often, that is the case, although not every single member of such a
loose group will subscribe to the same solution of the issue they
share.

In your quote, I assumed the author meant people he is in contact with,
though.
--
A computer will do what you tell it to do, but that may be much
different from what you had in mind. - Joseph Weizenbaum
Steve Hayes
2019-03-27 04:38:40 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 08:50:25 -0400, Quinn C
Post by Quinn C
Post by Steve Hayes
Though it has become increasingly common to refer to people who share
a common characteristic as a "community", I think it devalues the word
"community" unless those people also interact with each other.
Ex-pats from all over have nothing in common other than the fact that
they happen, for the moment, to be in a country other than their own.
I'm not sure if that usage of "community" is peculiarly South African.
I think I have seen it elsewhere as well.
Seems common to me. It's often meant to imply that they have certain
common interests, socially or politically - in the case of expats, for
example, regarding immigration or the status and rights of foreigners.
Often, that is the case, although not every single member of such a
loose group will subscribe to the same solution of the issue they
share.
In your quote, I assumed the author meant people he is in contact with,
though.
Yes, I think so, in that instance. I was digressing somewhat.

Inb the article I posted, the authoer was referring to people from
different countries who met and formed a community of foreigners.

But it just reminded me of the other usage, where, for example,
instead of saying "deaf people", people will speak of "the deaf
community".
--
Ignore the following - it's spammers for spambot fodder.

***@gmail.com
***@gmail.com
***@mail.ru
***@mail.ru
***@gmail.com
***@gmail.com
***@hotmail.com
***@gmail.com
***@gmail.com
***@gmail.com
***@gmail.com
***@gmail.com
***@gmail.com
***@gmail.com
***@gmail.com
***@gmail.com
***@gmail.com
Peter T. Daniels
2019-03-26 14:16:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve Hayes
Post by CDB
Post by Quinn C
"All around" I would understand as limited to a certain distance. In
the case of expats, neighboring countries - maybe not only direct
neighbors, but also the countries one over (another abuse?). But not
from all around the world.
As I read the phrase "a community of ex-pats from all over", it can
include people from anywhere in the world. I wonder if you're
interpreting it as "people from everywhere in the world", which does
seem less likely.
"All over" sounds quite OK to me.
What I would question about that is the use of the word "community" in
that context.
Though it has become increasingly common to refer to people who share
a common characteristic as a "community", I think it devalues the word
"community" unless those people also interact with each other.
Ex-pats from all over have nothing in common other than the fact that
they happen, for the moment, to be in a country other than their own.
No, "ex-pat" is someone who resides abroad (isn't merely traveling or on
vacation) and will not / cannot return home for some perhaps fairly
serious reason (that includes "tax exiles" like Anthony Burgess who were
trying to escape confiscatory income taxes, or my Israeli friend who
kept his professorship at a US university until he passed the age of
compulsory military service in the IDF or all its alternatives).
Post by Steve Hayes
I'm not sure if that usage of "community" is peculiarly South African.
I think I have seen it elsewhere as well.
Peter Duncanson [BrE]
2019-03-26 16:49:33 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 07:16:49 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Steve Hayes
Post by CDB
Post by Quinn C
"All around" I would understand as limited to a certain distance. In
the case of expats, neighboring countries - maybe not only direct
neighbors, but also the countries one over (another abuse?). But not
from all around the world.
As I read the phrase "a community of ex-pats from all over", it can
include people from anywhere in the world. I wonder if you're
interpreting it as "people from everywhere in the world", which does
seem less likely.
"All over" sounds quite OK to me.
What I would question about that is the use of the word "community" in
that context.
Though it has become increasingly common to refer to people who share
a common characteristic as a "community", I think it devalues the word
"community" unless those people also interact with each other.
Ex-pats from all over have nothing in common other than the fact that
they happen, for the moment, to be in a country other than their own.
No, "ex-pat" is someone who resides abroad (isn't merely traveling or on
vacation) and will not / cannot return home for some perhaps fairly
serious reason (that includes "tax exiles" like Anthony Burgess who were
trying to escape confiscatory income taxes, or my Israeli friend who
kept his professorship at a US university until he passed the age of
compulsory military service in the IDF or all its alternatives).
My understanding of "ex-pat/expat" (abbreviation of "expatriate") in
today's BrE is as here:
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/expatriate

noun
1 A person who lives outside their native country.

adjective
1 Denoting or relating to a person living outside their native
country.

That may include tax-exiles, etc, but also includes those who have
freely chosen to live outside their native country.

It does list this previous noun sense:

1.1 *archaic* Expelled from one's native country.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Steve Hayes
I'm not sure if that usage of "community" is peculiarly South African.
I think I have seen it elsewhere as well.
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
Peter T. Daniels
2019-03-26 17:33:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 07:16:49 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Steve Hayes
Ex-pats from all over have nothing in common other than the fact that
they happen, for the moment, to be in a country other than their own.
No, "ex-pat" is someone who resides abroad (isn't merely traveling or on
vacation) and will not / cannot return home for some perhaps fairly
serious reason (that includes "tax exiles" like Anthony Burgess who were
trying to escape confiscatory income taxes, or my Israeli friend who
kept his professorship at a US university until he passed the age of
compulsory military service in the IDF or all its alternatives).
My understanding of "ex-pat/expat" (abbreviation of "expatriate") in
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/expatriate
noun
1 A person who lives outside their native country.
adjective
1 Denoting or relating to a person living outside their native
country.
That may include tax-exiles, etc, but also includes those who have
freely chosen to live outside their native country.
As I said, _lives_, not someone who (as Steve suggested) merely happens
to be abroad.

If they intend never to return, why not change citizenship?
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
1.1 *archaic* Expelled from one's native country.
Cf. the famous cautionary tale, "The Man Without a Country" by Edward
Everett Hale.
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Steve Hayes
I'm not sure if that usage of "community" is peculiarly South African.
I think I have seen it elsewhere as well.
charles
2019-03-26 17:44:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 07:16:49 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Steve Hayes
Ex-pats from all over have nothing in common other than the fact that
they happen, for the moment, to be in a country other than their own.
No, "ex-pat" is someone who resides abroad (isn't merely traveling or on
vacation) and will not / cannot return home for some perhaps fairly
serious reason (that includes "tax exiles" like Anthony Burgess who were
trying to escape confiscatory income taxes, or my Israeli friend who
kept his professorship at a US university until he passed the age of
compulsory military service in the IDF or all its alternatives).
My understanding of "ex-pat/expat" (abbreviation of "expatriate") in
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/expatriate
noun
1 A person who lives outside their native country.
adjective
1 Denoting or relating to a person living outside their native
country.
That may include tax-exiles, etc, but also includes those who have
freely chosen to live outside their native country.
As I said, _lives_, not someone who (as Steve suggested) merely happens
to be abroad.
If they intend never to return, why not change citizenship?
That's what by BiL did in Canada - his son later moved to California and is
now a US citizen
--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle
Peter Duncanson [BrE]
2019-03-26 21:44:54 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 10:33:30 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 07:16:49 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Steve Hayes
Ex-pats from all over have nothing in common other than the fact that
they happen, for the moment, to be in a country other than their own.
No, "ex-pat" is someone who resides abroad (isn't merely traveling or on
vacation) and will not / cannot return home for some perhaps fairly
serious reason (that includes "tax exiles" like Anthony Burgess who were
trying to escape confiscatory income taxes, or my Israeli friend who
kept his professorship at a US university until he passed the age of
compulsory military service in the IDF or all its alternatives).
My understanding of "ex-pat/expat" (abbreviation of "expatriate") in
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/expatriate
noun
1 A person who lives outside their native country.
adjective
1 Denoting or relating to a person living outside their native
country.
That may include tax-exiles, etc, but also includes those who have
freely chosen to live outside their native country.
As I said, _lives_, not someone who (as Steve suggested) merely happens
to be abroad.
If they intend never to return, why not change citizenship?
They don't necessarily intend never to return.

For instance there are hundreds of thousands of citizens of the Irish
Republic living in Britain. It is said that most of them moved to
Britain with the intention of earning some money and then returning home
to the Republic, but that few of them do actually return home even
though they might not abandon the dream.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
1.1 *archaic* Expelled from one's native country.
Cf. the famous cautionary tale, "The Man Without a Country" by Edward
Everett Hale.
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Steve Hayes
I'm not sure if that usage of "community" is peculiarly South African.
I think I have seen it elsewhere as well.
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
HVS
2019-03-26 22:16:01 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 21:44:54 +0000, "Peter Duncanson [BrE]"
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 10:33:30 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 07:16:49 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Steve Hayes
Ex-pats from all over have nothing in common other than the
fact =
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
that
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Steve Hayes
they happen, for the moment, to be in a country other than
their =
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
own.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
Post by Peter T. Daniels
No, "ex-pat" is someone who resides abroad (isn't merely
traveling or=
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
on
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
Post by Peter T. Daniels
vacation) and will not / cannot return home for some perhaps fairly
serious reason (that includes "tax exiles" like Anthony Burgess
who =
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
were
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
Post by Peter T. Daniels
trying to escape confiscatory income taxes, or my Israeli
friend who
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
Post by Peter T. Daniels
kept his professorship at a US university until he passed the age of
compulsory military service in the IDF or all its alternatives).
My understanding of "ex-pat/expat" (abbreviation of
"expatriate") in
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/expatriate
noun
1 A person who lives outside their native country.
adjective
1 Denoting or relating to a person living outside their
native
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
country.
That may include tax-exiles, etc, but also includes those who have
freely chosen to live outside their native country.
As I said, _lives_, not someone who (as Steve suggested) merely happens
to be abroad.
If they intend never to return, why not change citizenship?
They don't necessarily intend never to return.
For instance there are hundreds of thousands of citizens of the Irish
Republic living in Britain. It is said that most of them moved to
Britain with the intention of earning some money and then returning home
to the Republic, but that few of them do actually return home even
though they might not abandon the dream.
Some postpone their return - I've known a few who have moved back to
Ireland when they retire (and a few Scots who have similarly retired
to Scotland).
Peter Moylan
2019-03-27 01:54:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by HVS
On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 21:44:54 +0000, "Peter Duncanson [BrE]"
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
For instance there are hundreds of thousands of citizens of the
Irish Republic living in Britain. It is said that most of them
moved to Britain with the intention of earning some money and then
returning home to the Republic, but that few of them do actually
return home even though they might not abandon the dream.
Some postpone their return - I've known a few who have moved back to
Ireland when they retire (and a few Scots who have similarly retired
to Scotland).
When I first came to Newcastle, it was with the expectation that I'd
move back to Melbourne after a year or two. (The two cities are in
different states, so there are some cultural differences.) That was
fifty years ago. If I moved back now it would be as a foreigner.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Jerry Friedman
2019-03-27 02:07:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by HVS
On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 21:44:54 +0000, "Peter Duncanson [BrE]"
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
For instance there are hundreds of thousands of citizens of the
Irish Republic living in Britain. It is said that most of them
moved to Britain with the intention of earning some money and then
returning home to the Republic, but that few of them do actually
return home even though they might not abandon the dream.
Some postpone their return - I've known a few who have moved back to
Ireland when they retire (and a few Scots who have similarly retired
to Scotland).
When I first came to Newcastle, it was with the expectation that I'd
move back to Melbourne after a year or two. (The two cities are in
different states, so there are some cultural differences.) That was
fifty years ago. If I moved back now it would be as a foreigner.
Does that make you an exstatriate?
--
Jerry Friedman
Peter Moylan
2019-03-27 02:29:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by HVS
On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 21:44:54 +0000, "Peter Duncanson [BrE]"
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
For instance there are hundreds of thousands of citizens of
the Irish Republic living in Britain. It is said that most of
them moved to Britain with the intention of earning some money
and then returning home to the Republic, but that few of them
do actually return home even though they might not abandon the
dream.
Some postpone their return - I've known a few who have moved back
to Ireland when they retire (and a few Scots who have similarly
retired to Scotland).
When I first came to Newcastle, it was with the expectation that
I'd move back to Melbourne after a year or two. (The two cities are
in different states, so there are some cultural differences.) That
was fifty years ago. If I moved back now it would be as a
foreigner.
Does that make you an exstatriate?
That made me look for Latin words for "state". The closest match I could
find makes me excitable. But perhaps exstatic would work.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2019-03-27 07:42:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by HVS
On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 21:44:54 +0000, "Peter Duncanson [BrE]"
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
For instance there are hundreds of thousands of citizens of
the Irish Republic living in Britain. It is said that most of
them moved to Britain with the intention of earning some money
and then returning home to the Republic, but that few of them
do actually return home even though they might not abandon the
dream.
Some postpone their return - I've known a few who have moved back
to Ireland when they retire (and a few Scots who have similarly
retired to Scotland).
When I first came to Newcastle, it was with the expectation that
I'd move back to Melbourne after a year or two. (The two cities are
in different states, so there are some cultural differences.) That
was fifty years ago. If I moved back now it would be as a
foreigner.
Does that make you an exstatriate?
That made me look for Latin words for "state". The closest match I could
find makes me excitable. But perhaps exstatic would work.
Lots of ecstatics in this group. Probably more than expats.
--
athel
Cheryl
2019-03-27 10:37:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by HVS
On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 21:44:54 +0000, "Peter Duncanson [BrE]"
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
For instance there are hundreds of thousands of citizens of the
Irish Republic living in Britain. It is said that most of them
moved to Britain with the intention of earning some money and then
returning home to the Republic, but that few of them do actually
return home even though they might not abandon the dream.
Some postpone their return - I've known a few who have moved back to
 Ireland when they retire (and a few Scots who have similarly retired
to Scotland).
When I first came to Newcastle, it was with the expectation that I'd
move back to Melbourne after a year or two. (The two cities are in
different states, so there are some cultural differences.) That was
fifty years ago. If I moved back now it would be as a foreigner.
That sort of situation is fairly common, I think, where the person who
left changes, and so does the place they left behind. A LOT of the
population of my home province move away for work, often with the
initial assumption that it will be a temporary move. There's a small
subset who are very vocal that of course they're moving back any day
now, and a remarkably rose-coloured vision of what the place is like
now, some 40 years or more after they left.

You get the reverse phenomena too - retirees moving to someplace they've
never been before - often becoming expats in the process. Sometimes they
do this part-time, as in the case of snowbirds in the US south. I can't
see the attraction myself, since I dislike moving and quite like where I
am, but it's certainly a common choice.
--
Cheryl
HVS
2019-03-27 15:22:19 UTC
Permalink
On 27 Mar 2019, Cheryl wrote

-snip-
Post by Cheryl
You get the reverse phenomena too - retirees moving to someplace they've
never been before - often becoming expats in the process. Sometimes they
do this part-time, as in the case of snowbirds in the US south. I can't
see the attraction myself, since I dislike moving and quite like where I
am, but it's certainly a common choice.
It's not uncommon in England for people to retire to the West Country
(Devon/Cornwall), usually for the gentler climate, and because you get more
house for your pound there.

But while it's not wise to tie yourself tightly to someplace because of where
your offspring live -- they may well want to move away for any of the usual
reasons that people move -- I've never seen the attraction of moving away
from a circle of friends that you've built up over a number of decades to go
somewhere where you don't know anyone, and have to start all over with
friend-finding.

(Doesn't apply if you've long wanted to change your circle of friends, of
course.)
--
Cheers, Harvey
CanEng (30yrs) and BrEng (34yrs), indiscriminately mixed
Madrigal Gurneyhalt
2019-03-27 16:26:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by HVS
-snip-
Post by Cheryl
You get the reverse phenomena too - retirees moving to someplace they've
never been before - often becoming expats in the process. Sometimes they
do this part-time, as in the case of snowbirds in the US south. I can't
see the attraction myself, since I dislike moving and quite like where I
am, but it's certainly a common choice.
It's not uncommon in England for people to retire to the West Country
(Devon/Cornwall), usually for the gentler climate, and because you get more
house for your pound there.
But while it's not wise to tie yourself tightly to someplace because of where
your offspring live -- they may well want to move away for any of the usual
reasons that people move -- I've never seen the attraction of moving away
from a circle of friends that you've built up over a number of decades to go
somewhere where you don't know anyone, and have to start all over with
friend-finding.
(Doesn't apply if you've long wanted to change your circle of friends, of
course.)
--
If you want gentler climate and more house per pound, you should
head for South West Scotland rather than South West England. Prices
round these parts are certainly lower than the home counties but not
by much and on the up.
Peter Moylan
2019-03-27 16:26:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by HVS
-snip-
Post by Cheryl
You get the reverse phenomena too - retirees moving to someplace
they've never been before - often becoming expats in the process.
Sometimes they do this part-time, as in the case of snowbirds in
the US south. I can't see the attraction myself, since I dislike
moving and quite like where I am, but it's certainly a common
choice.
It's not uncommon in England for people to retire to the West
Country (Devon/Cornwall), usually for the gentler climate, and
because you get more house for your pound there.
After last week's vacation, my wife has started asking whether I could
get a job in Fiji. I probably could, and the house/pound factor is
attractive. If we sold our house here, we could probably afford a really
luxurious house there.

The question I ask myself, though, is whether we could even afford to
return. Probably not. We would be stuck there forever. Which might be
acceptable in a "no worry, don't hurry" culture, but I'm not that sort
of person.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
HVS
2019-03-27 18:49:06 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 28 Mar 2019 03:26:40 +1100, Peter Moylan
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by HVS
-snip-
Post by Cheryl
You get the reverse phenomena too - retirees moving to someplace
they've never been before - often becoming expats in the process.
Sometimes they do this part-time, as in the case of snowbirds in
the US south. I can't see the attraction myself, since I dislike
moving and quite like where I am, but it's certainly a common
choice.
It's not uncommon in England for people to retire to the West
Country (Devon/Cornwall), usually for the gentler climate, and
because you get more house for your pound there.
After last week's vacation, my wife has started asking whether I could
get a job in Fiji. I probably could, and the house/pound factor is
attractive. If we sold our house here, we could probably afford a really
luxurious house there.
The question I ask myself, though, is whether we could even afford to
return. Probably not. We would be stuck there forever. Which might be
acceptable in a "no worry, don't hurry" culture, but I'm not that sort
of person.
That's definitely the case with west country retirement in England -
it's pretty well a non-reversible move.
Cheryl
2019-03-28 11:06:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by HVS
But while it's not wise to tie yourself tightly to someplace because of where
your offspring live -- they may well want to move away for any of the usual
reasons that people move -- I've never seen the attraction of moving away
from a circle of friends that you've built up over a number of decades to go
somewhere where you don't know anyone, and have to start all over with
friend-finding.
I've seen that happen a couple of times, too. The children are usually
working full-time and busy with their own circles, and the retirees, in
a strange place and sometimes with limits on their mobility, have left
all their friends behind, and are lonely.

But sometimes the choice (to move or not to move) is difficult because
staying can mean being too far away from family support, and with
friends who are getting old and sick.

One couple I knew slightly moved to a large and more rural area right
after retirement - the husband loved it; the wife rapidly got cabin
fever and started driving more than ever so she could hold down
temporary jobs in the city. I watch those TV shows about retired couples
planning to move to rural (and often sunny) locations with a kind of
fascinated horror. Not my thing at all - although the scenery is often
beautiful.
--
Cheryl
J. J. Lodder
2019-03-27 20:29:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Cheryl
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by HVS
On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 21:44:54 +0000, "Peter Duncanson [BrE]"
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
For instance there are hundreds of thousands of citizens of the
Irish Republic living in Britain. It is said that most of them
moved to Britain with the intention of earning some money and then
returning home to the Republic, but that few of them do actually
return home even though they might not abandon the dream.
Some postpone their return - I've known a few who have moved back to
Ireland when they retire (and a few Scots who have similarly retired
to Scotland).
When I first came to Newcastle, it was with the expectation that I'd
move back to Melbourne after a year or two. (The two cities are in
different states, so there are some cultural differences.) That was
fifty years ago. If I moved back now it would be as a foreigner.
That sort of situation is fairly common, I think, where the person who
left changes, and so does the place they left behind. A LOT of the
population of my home province move away for work, often with the
initial assumption that it will be a temporary move. There's a small
subset who are very vocal that of course they're moving back any day
now, and a remarkably rose-coloured vision of what the place is like
now, some 40 years or more after they left.
You get the reverse phenomena too - retirees moving to someplace they've
never been before - often becoming expats in the process. Sometimes they
do this part-time, as in the case of snowbirds in the US south. I can't
see the attraction myself, since I dislike moving and quite like where I
am, but it's certainly a common choice.
Dutch has the new word 'pensionado', 'pensionados',
for those who move to the Spanish Costas after retirement.

Great idea, good climate and so on,
but the drawback is that you have to live among the pensionados,

Jan
Cheryl
2019-03-27 10:32:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 10:33:30 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 07:16:49 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Steve Hayes
Ex-pats from all over have nothing in common other than the fact that
they happen, for the moment, to be in a country other than their own.
No, "ex-pat" is someone who resides abroad (isn't merely traveling or on
vacation) and will not / cannot return home for some perhaps fairly
serious reason (that includes "tax exiles" like Anthony Burgess who were
trying to escape confiscatory income taxes, or my Israeli friend who
kept his professorship at a US university until he passed the age of
compulsory military service in the IDF or all its alternatives).
My understanding of "ex-pat/expat" (abbreviation of "expatriate") in
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/expatriate
noun
1 A person who lives outside their native country.
adjective
1 Denoting or relating to a person living outside their native
country.
That may include tax-exiles, etc, but also includes those who have
freely chosen to live outside their native country.
As I said, _lives_, not someone who (as Steve suggested) merely happens
to be abroad.
If they intend never to return, why not change citizenship?
They don't necessarily intend never to return.
For instance there are hundreds of thousands of citizens of the Irish
Republic living in Britain. It is said that most of them moved to
Britain with the intention of earning some money and then returning home
to the Republic, but that few of them do actually return home even
though they might not abandon the dream.
That happens a lot in other places. People move to a foreign country
with the intention of saving a nest egg and moving home. Some do move
home eventually, some don't even though they keep thinking they will.

Another variation of ex-pat (OK, expat if Mark insists!) is the family
member of someone who moves to get work. I've got family members who
moved to the US because a parent or spouse needed to for work. Most of
them didn't form any allegiance to the US and moved back home when their
financial situation changed.
--
Cheryl
Peter Duncanson [BrE]
2019-03-27 11:29:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Cheryl
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 10:33:30 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 07:16:49 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Steve Hayes
Ex-pats from all over have nothing in common other than the fact that
they happen, for the moment, to be in a country other than their own.
No, "ex-pat" is someone who resides abroad (isn't merely traveling or on
vacation) and will not / cannot return home for some perhaps fairly
serious reason (that includes "tax exiles" like Anthony Burgess who were
trying to escape confiscatory income taxes, or my Israeli friend who
kept his professorship at a US university until he passed the age of
compulsory military service in the IDF or all its alternatives).
My understanding of "ex-pat/expat" (abbreviation of "expatriate") in
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/expatriate
noun
1 A person who lives outside their native country.
adjective
1 Denoting or relating to a person living outside their native
country.
That may include tax-exiles, etc, but also includes those who have
freely chosen to live outside their native country.
As I said, _lives_, not someone who (as Steve suggested) merely happens
to be abroad.
If they intend never to return, why not change citizenship?
They don't necessarily intend never to return.
For instance there are hundreds of thousands of citizens of the Irish
Republic living in Britain. It is said that most of them moved to
Britain with the intention of earning some money and then returning home
to the Republic, but that few of them do actually return home even
though they might not abandon the dream.
That happens a lot in other places. People move to a foreign country
with the intention of saving a nest egg and moving home. Some do move
home eventually, some don't even though they keep thinking they will.
Another variation of ex-pat (OK, expat if Mark insists!) is the family
member of someone who moves to get work. I've got family members who
moved to the US because a parent or spouse needed to for work. Most of
them didn't form any allegiance to the US and moved back home when their
financial situation changed.
Another thing that can keep ex(-)pats from returning "home" is producing
children in the country in which they are living. That tends to tie them
to their country of residence.
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
Jerry Friedman
2019-03-26 17:39:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 07:16:49 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Steve Hayes
Post by CDB
Post by Quinn C
"All around" I would understand as limited to a certain distance. In
the case of expats, neighboring countries - maybe not only direct
neighbors, but also the countries one over (another abuse?). But not
from all around the world.
As I read the phrase "a community of ex-pats from all over", it can
include people from anywhere in the world. I wonder if you're
interpreting it as "people from everywhere in the world", which does
seem less likely.
"All over" sounds quite OK to me.
What I would question about that is the use of the word "community" in
that context.
Though it has become increasingly common to refer to people who share
a common characteristic as a "community", I think it devalues the word
"community" unless those people also interact with each other.
Ex-pats from all over have nothing in common other than the fact that
they happen, for the moment, to be in a country other than their own.
No, "ex-pat" is someone who resides abroad (isn't merely traveling or on
vacation) and will not / cannot return home for some perhaps fairly
serious reason (that includes "tax exiles" like Anthony Burgess who were
trying to escape confiscatory income taxes, or my Israeli friend who
kept his professorship at a US university until he passed the age of
compulsory military service in the IDF or all its alternatives).
My understanding of "ex-pat/expat" (abbreviation of "expatriate") in
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/expatriate
noun
1 A person who lives outside their native country.
adjective
1 Denoting or relating to a person living outside their native
country.
That may include tax-exiles, etc, but also includes those who have
freely chosen to live outside their native country.
I agree that "expat" (much better than "ex-pat", as was pointed out to
me here a few years ago) includes people who are living in another
country temporarily as long as it's for a substantial period, not just
a visit. An American couple (friends of mine) who lived in Japan for
two years or so referred to themselves as expats.
--
Jerry Friedman
Anders D. Nygaard
2019-03-26 21:21:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 07:16:49 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
[...] >>>> Ex-pats from all over have nothing in common other than the fact that
Post by Steve Hayes
they happen, for the moment, to be in a country other than their own.
Agreed (see below)
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
No, "ex-pat" is someone who resides abroad (isn't merely traveling or on
vacation) and will not / cannot return home for some perhaps fairly
serious reason (that includes "tax exiles" like Anthony Burgess who were
trying to escape confiscatory income taxes, or my Israeli friend who
kept his professorship at a US university until he passed the age of
compulsory military service in the IDF or all its alternatives).
The operative word here is "perhaps". Again, see below.
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
My understanding of "ex-pat/expat" (abbreviation of "expatriate") in
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/expatriate
noun
1 A person who lives outside their native country.
adjective
1 Denoting or relating to a person living outside their native
country.
That may include tax-exiles, etc, but also includes those who have
freely chosen to live outside their native country.
I agree that "expat" (much better than "ex-pat", as was pointed out to
me here a few years ago) includes people who are living in another
country temporarily as long as it's for a substantial period, not just
a visit. An American couple (friends of mine) who lived in Japan for
two years or so referred to themselves as expats.
As did I (and my wife and children) for two years in Ukraine.
Quite voluntary, and part of my work for a Danish company.
A great experience for us all, I might add.

/Anders, Denmark.
J. J. Lodder
2019-03-27 08:21:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 07:16:49 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Steve Hayes
Post by CDB
Post by Quinn C
"All around" I would understand as limited to a certain distance. In
the case of expats, neighboring countries - maybe not only direct
neighbors, but also the countries one over (another abuse?). But not
from all around the world.
As I read the phrase "a community of ex-pats from all over", it can
include people from anywhere in the world. I wonder if you're
interpreting it as "people from everywhere in the world", which does
seem less likely.
"All over" sounds quite OK to me.
What I would question about that is the use of the word "community" in
that context.
Though it has become increasingly common to refer to people who share
a common characteristic as a "community", I think it devalues the word
"community" unless those people also interact with each other.
Ex-pats from all over have nothing in common other than the fact that
they happen, for the moment, to be in a country other than their own.
No, "ex-pat" is someone who resides abroad (isn't merely traveling or on
vacation) and will not / cannot return home for some perhaps fairly
serious reason (that includes "tax exiles" like Anthony Burgess who were
trying to escape confiscatory income taxes, or my Israeli friend who
kept his professorship at a US university until he passed the age of
compulsory military service in the IDF or all its alternatives).
My understanding of "ex-pat/expat" (abbreviation of "expatriate") in
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/expatriate
noun
1 A person who lives outside their native country.
adjective
1 Denoting or relating to a person living outside their native
country.
That may include tax-exiles, etc, but also includes those who have
freely chosen to live outside their native country.
1.1 *archaic* Expelled from one's native country.
Wouldn't be a bad idea to revive it,
for politicians who have made too much of a nuisance of themselves.
Those Athenians had some good ideas.

An ostrakon, anyone?
Or would that be an ex-pot?

Jan
Quinn C
2019-03-26 16:51:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Steve Hayes
Though it has become increasingly common to refer to people who share
a common characteristic as a "community", I think it devalues the word
"community" unless those people also interact with each other.
Ex-pats from all over have nothing in common other than the fact that
they happen, for the moment, to be in a country other than their own.
No, "ex-pat" is someone who resides abroad (isn't merely traveling or on
vacation) and will not / cannot return home for some perhaps fairly
serious reason (that includes "tax exiles" like Anthony Burgess who were
trying to escape confiscatory income taxes, or my Israeli friend who
kept his professorship at a US university until he passed the age of
compulsory military service in the IDF or all its alternatives).
That seems like a recent development to me. While it certainly has
expanded uses now, when I first encountered "ex-pat", it was mainly
referring to the very privileged foreigners who had been temporarily
sent to a faraway country by their government or company in exchange
for a generously expanded salary. These people typically deemed it
below their status or too confusing to mingle with the natives - more
likely to employ them as help - and mainly socialized with others like
them, thus forming an ex-pat community. The successors of the
colonists. Thus they were different from émigrés, who might not be able
to or want to return.

It may depend on the relative wealth of the country of origin and
residence.
--
In the old days, the complaints about the passing of the
golden age were much more sophisticated.
-- James Hogg in alt.usage.english
Cheryl
2019-03-26 17:03:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Quinn C
That seems like a recent development to me. While it certainly has
expanded uses now, when I first encountered "ex-pat", it was mainly
referring to the very privileged foreigners who had been temporarily
sent to a faraway country by their government or company in exchange
for a generously expanded salary. These people typically deemed it
below their status or too confusing to mingle with the natives - more
likely to employ them as help - and mainly socialized with others like
them, thus forming an ex-pat community. The successors of the
colonists. Thus they were different from émigrés, who might not be able
to or want to return.
It may depend on the relative wealth of the country of origin and
residence.
I've always assumed an ex-pat was simply someone temporarily living in a
country other than their own. Some of them were (and probably are), and
some aren't. I have indeed seen "community" used to refer to groups of
people who have some observable characteristic in common but no apparent
community life. I don't like that usage. "Ex-pat" community might imply
all ex-pats (wrongly, I think, because simply living in a country other
than one's own isn't enough to create a community), or the more
privileged ones you mention - who do sometimes self-identify as an
ex-pat community. But if you look around anywhere, you'll find lots of
ex-pats who don't fit the stereotype. Or you could, when I was an ex-pat
(minus the large salary, alas).

I don't get the point you're making about émigrés. Ex-pats range from
those on short-term jobs who go to their home country (or another
foreign one) immediately afterwards to those who never find the time to
be right to go "home", although they don't take out citizenship and thus
become immigrants in their country of residence. Some of them
undoubtedly are waiting until conditions are better (politically or
economically) back home before returning.
--
Cheryl
Peter T. Daniels
2019-03-26 17:36:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Cheryl
Post by Quinn C
That seems like a recent development to me. While it certainly has
expanded uses now, when I first encountered "ex-pat", it was mainly
referring to the very privileged foreigners who had been temporarily
sent to a faraway country by their government or company in exchange
for a generously expanded salary. These people typically deemed it
below their status or too confusing to mingle with the natives - more
likely to employ them as help - and mainly socialized with others like
them, thus forming an ex-pat community. The successors of the
colonists. Thus they were different from émigrés, who might not be able
to or want to return.
It may depend on the relative wealth of the country of origin and
residence.
I've always assumed an ex-pat was simply someone temporarily living in a
country other than their own. Some of them were (and probably are), and
some aren't. I have indeed seen "community" used to refer to groups of
people who have some observable characteristic in common but no apparent
community life. I don't like that usage. "Ex-pat" community might imply
all ex-pats (wrongly, I think, because simply living in a country other
than one's own isn't enough to create a community), or the more
privileged ones you mention - who do sometimes self-identify as an
ex-pat community. But if you look around anywhere, you'll find lots of
ex-pats who don't fit the stereotype. Or you could, when I was an ex-pat
(minus the large salary, alas).
I don't get the point you're making about émigrés. Ex-pats range from
those on short-term jobs who go to their home country (or another
foreign one) immediately afterwards to those who never find the time to
be right to go "home", although they don't take out citizenship and thus
become immigrants in their country of residence. Some of them
undoubtedly are waiting until conditions are better (politically or
economically) back home before returning.
I don't think of professors who take their sabbatical as a temporary
appointment in a university in another country as ex-pats. They're away
for a predetermined length of time and will return afterward.

If because of revolution or something they can't return home as planned,
they've become (involuntary) ex-pats.
Cheryl
2019-03-26 17:52:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
I don't think of professors who take their sabbatical as a temporary
appointment in a university in another country as ex-pats. They're away
for a predetermined length of time and will return afterward.
Unless they're on an unusually short sabbatical, I'd call them ex-pats.
Perhaps a year or so would be a cut-off. Many ex-pats are in a foreign
country for a predetermined period - although, of course, sometimes
their plans change and they stay longer.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
If because of revolution or something they can't return home as planned,
they've become (involuntary) ex-pats.
Yes, I'd include them as ex-pats. They're living more or less long term
in a foreign country, and with the intention of returning when the
political situation allows it.

Sometimes this results in their children, raised in a country that is
not foreign to them, choosing that country over the homeland. I've known
a few people, raised in more than one country by ex-pat parents, who
don't feel like any of them are "home".
--
Cheryl
Peter T. Daniels
2019-03-27 20:18:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Cheryl
Post by Peter T. Daniels
I don't think of professors who take their sabbatical as a temporary
appointment in a university in another country as ex-pats. They're away
for a predetermined length of time and will return afterward.
Unless they're on an unusually short sabbatical, I'd call them ex-pats.
Perhaps a year or so would be a cut-off. Many ex-pats are in a foreign
country for a predetermined period - although, of course, sometimes
their plans change and they stay longer.
My Australian-Israeli friend was here in NYC for a _two-year_ sabbatical
(with a university appointment). I'll ask him whether he thought of himself
as an expat (naah, ex-pat). He couldn't vote against Bibi because Israel
doesn't have absentee voting (they know Bibi would be out if the Israelis
Abroad could vote).

(Of course that adds the complication of AusE.)
Post by Cheryl
Post by Peter T. Daniels
If because of revolution or something they can't return home as planned,
they've become (involuntary) ex-pats.
Yes, I'd include them as ex-pats. They're living more or less long term
in a foreign country, and with the intention of returning when the
political situation allows it.
Sometimes this results in their children, raised in a country that is
not foreign to them, choosing that country over the homeland. I've known
a few people, raised in more than one country by ex-pat parents, who
don't feel like any of them are "home".
Mark Brader
2019-03-26 17:58:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Cheryl
Post by Quinn C
That seems like a recent development to me. While it certainly has
expanded uses now, when I first encountered "ex-pat", it was mainly
referring to the very privileged foreigners who had been temporarily
sent to a faraway country by their government or company...
I've always assumed an ex-pat was simply someone temporarily living in a
country other than their own.
Or else it's people who used to be named Patrick or Patricia.

You folks are talking about expats, dammit. An expat isn't an ex- anything.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto, ***@vex.net
"Omit needless code! Omit needless code! Omit needless code!"
-- Chip Salzenberg (after Strunk & White)
Cheryl
2019-03-26 18:10:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Brader
Post by Cheryl
Post by Quinn C
That seems like a recent development to me. While it certainly has
expanded uses now, when I first encountered "ex-pat", it was mainly
referring to the very privileged foreigners who had been temporarily
sent to a faraway country by their government or company...
I've always assumed an ex-pat was simply someone temporarily living in a
country other than their own.
Or else it's people who used to be named Patrick or Patricia.
You folks are talking about expats, dammit. An expat isn't an ex- anything.
I do see your point, and dictionaries generally agree with you. But on
the other hand, we have a patriated constitution, so we could have
people who were patriated to their home country, but now aren't. Like
inventing a term inspired by associate/ex-associate, only for citizens.

Given the number of peculiar words that are invented, this one doesn't
seem that bad to me!
--
Cheryl
charles
2019-03-26 18:20:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Brader
Post by Cheryl
Post by Quinn C
That seems like a recent development to me. While it certainly has
expanded uses now, when I first encountered "ex-pat", it was mainly
referring to the very privileged foreigners who had been temporarily
sent to a faraway country by their government or company...
I've always assumed an ex-pat was simply someone temporarily living in a
country other than their own.
Or else it's people who used to be named Patrick or Patricia.
You folks are talking about expats, dammit. An expat isn't an ex- anything.
ex = "out of" in latin,
--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle
Jerry Friedman
2019-03-26 18:47:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Brader
Post by Cheryl
Post by Quinn C
That seems like a recent development to me. While it certainly has
expanded uses now, when I first encountered "ex-pat", it was mainly
referring to the very privileged foreigners who had been temporarily
sent to a faraway country by their government or company...
I've always assumed an ex-pat was simply someone temporarily living in a
country other than their own.
Or else it's people who used to be named Patrick or Patricia.
You folks are talking about expats, dammit. An expat isn't an ex- anything.
...

Now I remember who corrected me.
--
Jerry Friedman
Quinn C
2019-03-26 21:40:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Cheryl
Post by Quinn C
That seems like a recent development to me. While it certainly has
expanded uses now, when I first encountered "ex-pat", it was mainly
referring to the very privileged foreigners who had been temporarily
sent to a faraway country by their government or company in exchange
for a generously expanded salary. These people typically deemed it
below their status or too confusing to mingle with the natives - more
likely to employ them as help - and mainly socialized with others like
them, thus forming an ex-pat community. The successors of the
colonists. Thus they were different from émigrés, who might not be able
to or want to return.
It may depend on the relative wealth of the country of origin and
residence.
I've always assumed an ex-pat was simply someone temporarily living in a
country other than their own. Some of them were (and probably are), and
some aren't. I have indeed seen "community" used to refer to groups of
people who have some observable characteristic in common but no apparent
community life. I don't like that usage. "Ex-pat" community might imply
all ex-pats (wrongly, I think, because simply living in a country other
than one's own isn't enough to create a community), or the more
privileged ones you mention - who do sometimes self-identify as an
ex-pat community. But if you look around anywhere, you'll find lots of
ex-pats who don't fit the stereotype. Or you could, when I was an ex-pat
(minus the large salary, alas).
I don't get the point you're making about émigrés. Ex-pats range from
those on short-term jobs who go to their home country (or another
foreign one) immediately afterwards to those who never find the time to
be right to go "home", although they don't take out citizenship and thus
become immigrants in their country of residence. Some of them
undoubtedly are waiting until conditions are better (politically or
economically) back home before returning.
PTD seemed to claim that expats are typically people who can't go home.
For me, that's more true for "émigré" - the word indicates someone who
had to leave, whereas expats are for the most part people who wanted to
go somewhere else for a while.

One can include people who go for a 3-month training or people who are
likely to stay abroad in expats, but the *typical* expat, for me, is in
between - somewhat longer-term, measured in years, there for a purpose
that was determined before they left, and with plans to return when
that's over.

I don't consider myself a typical expat. At most I was one before I
took out permanent residence, but I started straying from the typical
when I stayed after the occupation that brought me here was finished
and sought out local employment.
--
WinErr 008: Erroneous error. Nothing is wrong.

Disclaimer: I, Quinn, don't believe this to be an actual Windows
error message.
Anton Shepelev
2019-03-27 21:21:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Quinn C
WinErr 008: Erroneous error. Nothing is wrong.
Disclaimer: I, Quinn, don't believe this to be an actual Windows
error message.
But I remeber seeing a similar error message in a
Russian version of Windows XP. It ran like this:

bla-bla-bla crashed because of the following error: no error.
--
() ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\ http://preview.tinyurl.com/qcy6mjc [archived]
Quinn C
2019-03-27 22:49:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anton Shepelev
Post by Quinn C
WinErr 008: Erroneous error. Nothing is wrong.
Disclaimer: I, Quinn, don't believe this to be an actual Windows
error message.
But I remeber seeing a similar error message in a
bla-bla-bla crashed because of the following error: no error.
I seem to remember something similar, but my text is certainly not a
literal quote.

I think this is real, but it's an application error.
<https://www.torontomike.com/2010/06/no_error_occurred_error_messag.html>

I'm also pretty sure I've seen "error occurred while displaying an
error" from Windows itself.
<https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-3d907bb69d9d1b9bcd40d91028ed5c34-c>
--
We say, 'If any lady or gentleman shall buy this article _____ shall
have it for five dollars.' The blank may be filled with he, she, it,
or they; or in any other manner; and yet the form of the expression
will be too vulgar to be uttered. -- Wkly Jrnl of Commerce (1839)
Snidely
2019-03-28 08:03:50 UTC
Permalink
Quinn C suggested that ...
Post by Quinn C
Post by Anton Shepelev
Post by Quinn C
WinErr 008: Erroneous error. Nothing is wrong.
Disclaimer: I, Quinn, don't believe this to be an actual Windows
error message.
But I remeber seeing a similar error message in a
bla-bla-bla crashed because of the following error: no error.
I seem to remember something similar, but my text is certainly not a
literal quote.
I think this is real, but it's an application error.
<https://www.torontomike.com/2010/06/no_error_occurred_error_messag.html>
I'm also pretty sure I've seen "error occurred while displaying an
error" from Windows itself.
<https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-3d907bb69d9d1b9bcd40d91028ed5c34-c>
One can certainly see a similar message from a Python interpreter when
some tracebacks fail (usually because of a shortage of memory or
storage, or a locked resource).

/dps
--
Killing a mouse was hardly a Nobel Prize-worthy exercise, and Lawrence
went apopleptic when he learned a lousy rodent had peed away all his
precious heavy water.
_The Disappearing Spoon_, Sam Kean
Tony Cooper
2019-03-28 14:20:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Snidely
One can certainly see a similar message from a Python interpreter when
some tracebacks fail
Well, they did use some specifically British terms and allusions, but
I don't think the viewers needed an interpreter. I never have
understood the "The Larch" bit, though.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Peter Moylan
2019-03-28 15:42:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by Snidely
One can certainly see a similar message from a Python interpreter
when some tracebacks fail
Well, they did use some specifically British terms and allusions, but
I don't think the viewers needed an interpreter. I never have
understood the "The Larch" bit, though.
I'll take that as a "straight man" response. Interestingly, the Python
that Snidely is talking about has absolutely nothing in common with
Monty. And very little in common with the snake of the same name.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Tony Cooper
2019-03-28 15:53:15 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 29 Mar 2019 02:42:25 +1100, Peter Moylan
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by Snidely
One can certainly see a similar message from a Python interpreter
when some tracebacks fail
Well, they did use some specifically British terms and allusions, but
I don't think the viewers needed an interpreter. I never have
understood the "The Larch" bit, though.
I'll take that as a "straight man" response.
You would be wrong.
Post by Peter Moylan
Interestingly, the Python
that Snidely is talking about has absolutely nothing in common with
Monty.
I know.
Post by Peter Moylan
And very little in common with the snake of the same name.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Lewis
2019-03-28 15:42:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by Snidely
One can certainly see a similar message from a Python interpreter when
some tracebacks fail
Well, they did use some specifically British terms and allusions, but
I don't think the viewers needed an interpreter. I never have
understood the "The Larch" bit, though.
Not sure there is something to understand, really. I suspect the main
reason the larch was chosen was simply because of the sound of the word.

The only other relevant things I could think of, perhaps, is it is not
native to Great Britain, and despite being a conifer, it loses its
needles in the winter.

But really, it's the sort of nonsense sketch that becomes funny from
the delivery much more so that simply reading the words (much like the
wink wink nudge nudge sketch), as well as the repetitive call-backs.
--
W is for WINNIE embedded in ice
X is for XERXES devoured by mice
Tony Cooper
2019-03-28 15:55:53 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 28 Mar 2019 15:42:46 -0000 (UTC), Lewis
Post by Lewis
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by Snidely
One can certainly see a similar message from a Python interpreter when
some tracebacks fail
Well, they did use some specifically British terms and allusions, but
I don't think the viewers needed an interpreter. I never have
understood the "The Larch" bit, though.
Not sure there is something to understand, really. I suspect the main
reason the larch was chosen was simply because of the sound of the word.
The only other relevant things I could think of, perhaps, is it is not
native to Great Britain, and despite being a conifer, it loses its
needles in the winter.
But really, it's the sort of nonsense sketch that becomes funny from
the delivery much more so that simply reading the words (much like the
wink wink nudge nudge sketch), as well as the repetitive call-backs.
That was one of the interesting things about the Python sketches. I'd
often find myself laughing at something I did not understand simply
because it was so incongruous.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
RH Draney
2019-03-28 16:11:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by Snidely
One can certainly see a similar message from a Python interpreter when
some tracebacks fail
Well, they did use some specifically British terms and allusions, but
I don't think the viewers needed an interpreter. I never have
understood the "The Larch" bit, though.
My hovercraft is full of eels....r
Jerry Friedman
2019-03-25 18:35:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anton Shepelev
It is my unjustified, uneducated, but experi-
enced and strong opinion that the adverb "all
over" must be traceable, in one way or another,
to a noun occuring previously in the same sen-
tece. The connection may go through a verb for
which that noun is the subject or through an ad-
That is an interesting approach. I will keep my
eyes open for other occurrences of the expression,
and test them against it.
Consider it an adverb werewolfed from a preposition
but retaining its craving for a noun. The differ-
ence from "all around", which I mentioned elsewere
in the thread, is obvious: in "all around" 'all'
means everything, whereas in "all over" it is an in-
ternal adverb modifying (and emphasizing) 'over'.
I understand "all around" as having just such an adverb (though
I don't know what you mean by "internal adverb"). So does the
OED, which says "all around" comes from " < all adv. + around adv."
and defines it (under "all round") as "Everywhere around, completely
around; in all respects; for all concerned, so as to include
everyone."

English also has "from above", "from below", and "from behind"
without objects, plus a few others.
--
Jerry Friedman
Post by Anton Shepelev
Perhaps the unexpressed noun here is "the world",
faintly suggested by the notion of countries in-
troduced by "expats".
which turns "all over" back into a preposition.
--
() ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\ http://preview.tinyurl.com/qcy6mjc [archived]
Jerry Friedman
2019-03-25 20:35:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anton Shepelev
It is my unjustified, uneducated, but experi-
enced and strong opinion that the adverb "all
over" must be traceable, in one way or another,
to a noun occuring previously in the same sen-
tece. The connection may go through a verb for
which that noun is the subject or through an ad-
That is an interesting approach. I will keep my
eyes open for other occurrences of the expression,
and test them against it.
Consider it an adverb werewolfed from a preposition
but retaining its craving for a noun. The differ-
ence from "all around", which I mentioned elsewere
in the thread, is obvious: in "all around" 'all'
means everything, whereas in "all over" it is an in-
ternal adverb modifying (and emphasizing) 'over'.
I understand "all around" as having just such an adverb (though
I don't know what you mean by "internal adverb"). So does the
OED, which says "all around" comes from " < all adv. + around adv."
and defines it (under "all round") as "Everywhere around, completely
around; in all respects; for all concerned, so as to include
everyone."

English also has "from above", "from below", and "from behind"
without objects, plus a few others.
--
Jerry Friedman
Kerr-Mudd,John
2019-03-22 16:42:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anton Shepelev
Most people know that what the British call
aubergines, for instance, are what is known else-
where as eggplants.
what *are* known as eggplants, maybe?
Aubergeens. What are small Youth Hostels in France called?
--
Bah, and indeed, Humbug.
Anton Shepelev
2019-03-22 20:24:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kerr-Mudd,John
Post by Anton Shepelev
what *are* known as eggplants, maybe?
Aubergeens. What are small Youth Hostels in France
called?
I am sorry, messrs. Kerr-Mudd and John, but I never
had the wit nor cultural background to play this
game.
--
() ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\ http://preview.tinyurl.com/qcy6mjc [archived]
CDB
2019-03-23 12:02:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kerr-Mudd,John
Post by Anton Shepelev
Most people know that what the British call
aubergines, for instance, are what is known else-
where as eggplants.
what *are* known as eggplants, maybe?
Aubergeens. What are small Youth Hostels in France called?
At the sign of the Incapable Cranberry. D’où viens-tu, bergère?
Colonel Edmund J. Burke
2019-03-21 14:29:33 UTC
Permalink
LOL
occam
2019-03-25 19:12:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve Hayes
If you want to write for your reader’s English it will also help you
immensely if you become more familiar with the different Englishes.
Not only. If the English document you are writing is intended for
EurEnglish speakers (English as spoken by Continental Europeans), then
you do well to be familiar with the native language of the target's
native language.

Why is this important? Imagine you are writing a proposal for funding,
being evaluated by a panel of judges for whom English is a second language.

You do well to exclude English idioms, avoid words which are peculiar to
English and use instead words which have equivalents in (French,
Spanish, Italian...), not just other Englishes.
Peter T. Daniels
2019-03-25 21:30:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by occam
Post by Steve Hayes
If you want to write for your reader’s English it will also help you
immensely if you become more familiar with the different Englishes.
Not only. If the English document you are writing is intended for
EurEnglish speakers (English as spoken by Continental Europeans), then
you do well to be familiar with the native language of the target's
native language.
Why is this important? Imagine you are writing a proposal for funding,
being evaluated by a panel of judges for whom English is a second language.
You do well to exclude English idioms, avoid words which are peculiar to
English and use instead words which have equivalents in (French,
Spanish, Italian...), not just other Englishes.
But then you need to be especially careful to avoid faux amis.
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2019-03-26 07:25:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by occam
Post by Steve Hayes
If you want to write for your reader’s English it will also help you
immensely if you become more familiar with the different Englishes.
Not only. If the English document you are writing is intended for
EurEnglish speakers (English as spoken by Continental Europeans), then
you do well to be familiar with the native language of the target's
native language.
Why is this important? Imagine you are writing a proposal for funding,
being evaluated by a panel of judges for whom English is a second language.
You do well to exclude English idioms, avoid words which are peculiar to
English and use instead words which have equivalents in (French,
Spanish, Italian...), not just other Englishes.
But then you need to be especially careful to avoid faux amis.
That assumes that you know which amis are faux.

Yesterday I was reading a referee's report on a paper submitted by some
of my colleagues. The report was obviously written by someone who is
not a native speaker of English, but that didn't stop him from
commenting unfavourably on the English of the paper. Even the sentence
in which he concluded that the authors could not be native speakers
contained three faults of English: "I can read (conclude?) from the
list of authors that none of the colleagues involved (? coauthors?) are
actually (meaningless in context, but many native speakers would write
"actually" or "in fact" here, so I don't count that as a fault) native
speakers in English (of English). He complains about "misplaced
commas", though without giving examples, but uses misplaced commas
himself ("there has been no experiment, which supports this idea...")
that point clearly towards a German speaker, together with occasional
German-style quotation marks.
--
athel
occam
2019-03-26 09:55:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Steve Hayes
If you want to write for your reader’s English it will also help you
immensely if you become more familiar with the different Englishes.
Not only. If the English document you are writing  is intended for
EurEnglish speakers (English as spoken by Continental Europeans), then
you do well to be familiar with the native language of the target's
native language.
Why is this important? Imagine you are writing a proposal for funding,
being evaluated by a panel of judges for whom English is a second language.
You do well to exclude English idioms, avoid words which are peculiar to
English and use instead words which have equivalents in (French,
Spanish, Italian...), not just other Englishes.
But then you need to be especially careful to avoid faux amis.
That assumes that  you know which amis are faux.
Yesterday I was reading a referee's report on a paper submitted by some
of my colleagues. The report was obviously written by someone who is not
a native speaker of English, but that didn't stop him from commenting
unfavourably on the English of the paper. Even the sentence in which he
concluded that the authors could not be native speakers contained three
faults of English: "I can read (conclude?) from the list of authors that
none of the colleagues involved (? coauthors?) are actually (meaningless
in context, but many native speakers would write "actually" or "in fact"
here, so I don't count that as a fault) native speakers in English (of
English). He complains about "misplaced commas", though without giving
examples, but uses misplaced commas himself ("there has been no
experiment, which supports this idea...") that point clearly towards a
German speaker, together with occasional German-style quotation marks.
"Actually" is a bad word choice in the context I described. It is one of
those faux amis which the French interpret as "currently".

Aside- You refer to your (anonymous?) evaluator as 'he', even if you
guess at his nationality as being German. Before someone here jumps on
you for sexist stereotyping, can you justify your assumption?
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2019-03-26 10:14:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by occam
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Steve Hayes
If you want to write for your reader’s English it will also help you
immensely if you become more familiar with the different Englishes.
Not only. If the English document you are writing  is intended for
EurEnglish speakers (English as spoken by Continental Europeans), then
you do well to be familiar with the native language of the target's
native language.
Why is this important? Imagine you are writing a proposal for funding,
being evaluated by a panel of judges for whom English is a second language.
You do well to exclude English idioms, avoid words which are peculiar to
English and use instead words which have equivalents in (French,
Spanish, Italian...), not just other Englishes.
But then you need to be especially careful to avoid faux amis.
That assumes that  you know which amis are faux.
Yesterday I was reading a referee's report on a paper submitted by some
of my colleagues. The report was obviously written by someone who is not
a native speaker of English, but that didn't stop him from commenting
unfavourably on the English of the paper. Even the sentence in which he
concluded that the authors could not be native speakers contained three
faults of English: "I can read (conclude?) from the list of authors that
none of the colleagues involved (? coauthors?) are actually (meaningless
in context, but many native speakers would write "actually" or "in fact"
here, so I don't count that as a fault) native speakers in English (of
English). He complains about "misplaced commas", though without giving
examples, but uses misplaced commas himself ("there has been no
experiment, which supports this idea...") that point clearly towards a
German speaker, together with occasional German-style quotation marks.
"Actually" is a bad word choice in the context I described. It is one of
those faux amis which the French interpret as "currently".
Aside- You refer to your (anonymous?) evaluator as 'he', even if you
guess at his nationality as being German. Before someone here jumps on
you for sexist stereotyping, can you justify your assumption?
It's obvious who he is (not necessarily obvious to me, but obvious to
the authors of the paper).
--
athel
Steve Hayes
2019-03-26 05:25:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by occam
Post by Steve Hayes
If you want to write for your reader’s English it will also help you
immensely if you become more familiar with the different Englishes.
Not only. If the English document you are writing is intended for
EurEnglish speakers (English as spoken by Continental Europeans), then
you do well to be familiar with the native language of the target's
native language.
Why is this important? Imagine you are writing a proposal for funding,
being evaluated by a panel of judges for whom English is a second language.
You do well to exclude English idioms, avoid words which are peculiar to
English and use instead words which have equivalents in (French,
Spanish, Italian...), not just other Englishes.
Yes and no.

I think that there are times when the use of a bland international
English in a book can look a bit stilted, and people often object to
that quite strongly. There were objections in aue to the US
translations of the Harry Potter books.

One solution, which I have seen used quite effectively is to provide a
glossary of local terms used. This has been done in a series of
detective novels set in Botswana, which I highly recommend to fans of
the genre.

My review of the first of the series here:

https://khanya.wordpress.com/2019/02/27/a-carrion-death/
--
Stephen Hayes, Author of The Year of the Dragon
Sample or purchase The Year of the Dragon:
https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/907935
Web site: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail: ***@dunelm.org.uk
Jerry Friedman
2019-03-27 22:05:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve Hayes
Post by occam
Post by Steve Hayes
If you want to write for your reader’s English it will also help you
immensely if you become more familiar with the different Englishes.
Not only. If the English document you are writing is intended for
EurEnglish speakers (English as spoken by Continental Europeans), then
you do well to be familiar with the native language of the target's
native language.
Why is this important? Imagine you are writing a proposal for funding,
being evaluated by a panel of judges for whom English is a second language.
You do well to exclude English idioms, avoid words which are peculiar to
English and use instead words which have equivalents in (French,
Spanish, Italian...), not just other Englishes.
Yes and no.
I think that there are times when the use of a bland international
English in a book can look a bit stilted, and people often object to
that quite strongly. There were objections in aue to the US
translations of the Harry Potter books.
One solution, which I have seen used quite effectively is to provide a
glossary of local terms used. This has been done in a series of
detective novels set in Botswana, which I highly recommend to fans of
the genre.
https://khanya.wordpress.com/2019/02/27/a-carrion-death/
There's a series of detective novels set in Botswana that's not
Ladies No 1? At least the hero appears to be traditionally
built.
--
Jerry Friedman
Ken Blake
2019-03-27 23:50:32 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 27 Mar 2019 15:05:31 -0700 (PDT), Jerry Friedman
Post by Jerry Friedman
Post by Steve Hayes
Post by occam
Post by Steve Hayes
If you want to write for your reader’s English it will also help you
immensely if you become more familiar with the different Englishes.
Not only. If the English document you are writing is intended for
EurEnglish speakers (English as spoken by Continental Europeans), then
you do well to be familiar with the native language of the target's
native language.
Why is this important? Imagine you are writing a proposal for funding,
being evaluated by a panel of judges for whom English is a second language.
You do well to exclude English idioms, avoid words which are peculiar to
English and use instead words which have equivalents in (French,
Spanish, Italian...), not just other Englishes.
Yes and no.
I think that there are times when the use of a bland international
English in a book can look a bit stilted, and people often object to
that quite strongly. There were objections in aue to the US
translations of the Harry Potter books.
One solution, which I have seen used quite effectively is to provide a
glossary of local terms used. This has been done in a series of
detective novels set in Botswana, which I highly recommend to fans of
the genre.
https://khanya.wordpress.com/2019/02/27/a-carrion-death/
There's a series of detective novels set in Botswana that's not
Ladies No 1? At least the hero appears to be traditionally
built.
I've read three books by Alexander McCall Smith. I liked the first
two--"My Italian Bulldozer" and "The Good Pilot Peter Woodhouse"--and
then I read one of the later Ladies No 1 Detective Agency books--"The
House of Unexpected Sisters," which I didn't like at all. I'll try
another one or two, but if they are like that one, I'll give up.
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...