Literal meaning of "swings and roundabouts?"

[z***@zenofzero.net]

There seems to be a British saying, "What you lose on the swings you gain
on the roundabouts." The figurative meaning seems to be something like
"It's a wash," or "it's close to an even tradeoff" or "the law of averages
applies" or "it all evens out in the end."
Does anyone know what the origin and _literal_ meaning of the saying is?
Carnival rides, maybe?
--
Daniel P. B. Smith

The origin:

Roundabouts and Swings
by
Patrick R Chalmers

It was early last September nigh to Framlin'am-on-Sea,
An' 'twas Fair-day come to-morrow, an' the time was after tea,
An' I met a painted caravan adown a dusty lane,
A Pharaoh with his waggons comin' jolt an' creak an' strain;
A cheery cove an' sunburnt, bold o' eye and wrinkled up,
An' beside him on the splashboard sat a brindled tarrier pup,
An' a lurcher wise as Solomon an' lean as fiddle-strings
Was joggin' in the dust along 'is roundabouts and swings.

"Goo'-day," said 'e; "Goo'-day," said I; "an' 'ow d'you find things go,
An' what's the chance o' millions when you runs a travellin' show?"
"I find," said 'e, "things very much as 'ow I've always found,
For mostly they goes up and down or else goes round and round."
Said 'e, "The job's the very spit o' what it always were,
It's bread and bacon mostly when the dog don't catch a 'are;
But lookin' at it broad, an' while it ain't no merchant king's,
What's lost upon the roundabouts we pulls up on the swings!"

"Goo' luck," said 'e; "Goo' luck," said I; "you've put it past a doubt;
An' keep that lurcher on the road, the gamekeepers is out."
'E thumped upon the footboard an' 'e lumbered on again
To meet a gold-dust sunset down the owl-light in the lane;
An' the moon she climbed the 'azels, while a night-jar seemed to spin
That Pharaoh's wisdom o'er again, 'is sooth of lose-and-win;
For "up an' down an' round," said 'e, "goes all appointed things,
An' losses on the roundabouts means profits on the swings!"

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Post by z***@zenofzero.net

There seems to be a British saying, "What you lose on the swings you gain
on the roundabouts." The figurative meaning seems to be something like
"It's a wash," or "it's close to an even tradeoff" or "the law of averages
applies" or "it all evens out in the end."
Does anyone know what the origin and _literal_ meaning of the saying is?
Carnival rides, maybe?
--
Daniel P. B. Smith

I expect Daniel P. B. Smith has been sitting anxiously in front of his
computer for 18 years waiting in increasing desperation for your reply.

Post by z***@zenofzero.net
Roundabouts and Swings
by
Patrick R Chalmers
It was early last September nigh to Framlin'am-on-Sea,
An' 'twas Fair-day come to-morrow, an' the time was after tea,
An' I met a painted caravan adown a dusty lane,
A Pharaoh with his waggons comin' jolt an' creak an' strain;
A cheery cove an' sunburnt, bold o' eye and wrinkled up,
An' beside him on the splashboard sat a brindled tarrier pup,
An' a lurcher wise as Solomon an' lean as fiddle-strings
Was joggin' in the dust along 'is roundabouts and swings.
"Goo'-day," said 'e; "Goo'-day," said I; "an' 'ow d'you find things go,
An' what's the chance o' millions when you runs a travellin' show?"
"I find," said 'e, "things very much as 'ow I've always found,
For mostly they goes up and down or else goes round and round."
Said 'e, "The job's the very spit o' what it always were,
It's bread and bacon mostly when the dog don't catch a 'are;
But lookin' at it broad, an' while it ain't no merchant king's,
What's lost upon the roundabouts we pulls up on the swings!"
"Goo' luck," said 'e; "Goo' luck," said I; "you've put it past a doubt;
An' keep that lurcher on the road, the gamekeepers is out."
'E thumped upon the footboard an' 'e lumbered on again
To meet a gold-dust sunset down the owl-light in the lane;
An' the moon she climbed the 'azels, while a night-jar seemed to spin
That Pharaoh's wisdom o'er again, 'is sooth of lose-and-win;
For "up an' down an' round," said 'e, "goes all appointed things,
An' losses on the roundabouts means profits on the swings!"

[Zoroaster]

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by z***@zenofzero.net

There seems to be a British saying, "What you lose on the swings you gain
on the roundabouts." The figurative meaning seems to be something like
"It's a wash," or "it's close to an even tradeoff" or "the law of averages
applies" or "it all evens out in the end."
Does anyone know what the origin and _literal_ meaning of the saying is?
Carnival rides, maybe?
--
Daniel P. B. Smith

I expect Daniel P. B. Smith has been sitting anxiously in front of his
computer for 18 years waiting in increasing desperation for your reply.

Post by z***@zenofzero.net
Roundabouts and Swings
by
Patrick R Chalmers
It was early last September nigh to Framlin'am-on-Sea,
An' 'twas Fair-day come to-morrow, an' the time was after tea,
An' I met a painted caravan adown a dusty lane,
A Pharaoh with his waggons comin' jolt an' creak an' strain;
A cheery cove an' sunburnt, bold o' eye and wrinkled up,
An' beside him on the splashboard sat a brindled tarrier pup,
An' a lurcher wise as Solomon an' lean as fiddle-strings
Was joggin' in the dust along 'is roundabouts and swings.
"Goo'-day," said 'e; "Goo'-day," said I; "an' 'ow d'you find things go,
An' what's the chance o' millions when you runs a travellin' show?"
"I find," said 'e, "things very much as 'ow I've always found,
For mostly they goes up and down or else goes round and round."
Said 'e, "The job's the very spit o' what it always were,
It's bread and bacon mostly when the dog don't catch a 'are;
But lookin' at it broad, an' while it ain't no merchant king's,
What's lost upon the roundabouts we pulls up on the swings!"
"Goo' luck," said 'e; "Goo' luck," said I; "you've put it past a doubt;
An' keep that lurcher on the road, the gamekeepers is out."
'E thumped upon the footboard an' 'e lumbered on again
To meet a gold-dust sunset down the owl-light in the lane;
An' the moon she climbed the 'azels, while a night-jar seemed to spin
That Pharaoh's wisdom o'er again, 'is sooth of lose-and-win;
For "up an' down an' round," said 'e, "goes all appointed things,
An' losses on the roundabouts means profits on the swings!"

--
athel

Why do you assume that I was attempting to inform Smith, rather than (for example) attempting to inform someone else who arrived at this page via an internet search or (as another example) seeking to identify snarky commentators? Was your goal to assist others or to try to bring someone down to your level?

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Post by Zoroaster

Post by z***@zenofzero.net

There seems to be a British saying, "What you lose on the swings you gain
on the roundabouts." The figurative meaning seems to be something like
"It's a wash," or "it's close to an even tradeoff" or "the law of averages
applies" or "it all evens out in the end."
Does anyone know what the origin and _literal_ meaning of the saying is?
Carnival rides, maybe?
--
Daniel P. B. Smith

I expect Daniel P. B. Smith has been sitting anxiously in front of his>
computer for 18 years waiting in increasing desperation for your reply.

Post by z***@zenofzero.net
Roundabouts and Swings
by
Patrick R Chalmers
It was early last September nigh to Framlin'am-on-Sea,
An' 'twas Fair-day come to-morrow, an' the time was after tea,
An' I met a painted caravan adown a dusty lane,
A Pharaoh with his waggons comin' jolt an' creak an' strain;
A cheery cove an' sunburnt, bold o' eye and wrinkled up,
An' beside him on the splashboard sat a brindled tarrier pup,
An' a lurcher wise as Solomon an' lean as fiddle-strings
Was joggin' in the dust along 'is roundabouts and swings.
"Goo'-day," said 'e; "Goo'-day," said I; "an' 'ow d'you find things go,
An' what's the chance o' millions when you runs a travellin' show?"
"I find," said 'e, "things very much as 'ow I've always found,
For mostly they goes up and down or else goes round and round."
Said 'e, "The job's the very spit o' what it always were,
It's bread and bacon mostly when the dog don't catch a 'are;
But lookin' at it broad, an' while it ain't no merchant king's,
What's lost upon the roundabouts we pulls up on the swings!"
"Goo' luck," said 'e; "Goo' luck," said I; "you've put it past a doubt;
An' keep that lurcher on the road, the gamekeepers is out."
'E thumped upon the footboard an' 'e lumbered on again
To meet a gold-dust sunset down the owl-light in the lane;
An' the moon she climbed the 'azels, while a night-jar seemed to spin
That Pharaoh's wisdom o'er again, 'is sooth of lose-and-win;
For "up an' down an' round," said 'e, "goes all appointed things,
An' losses on the roundabouts means profits on the swings!"

--
athel

Why do you assume that I was attempting to inform Smith, rather than
(for example) attempting to inform someone else who arrived at this
page via an internet search or (as another example) seeking to identify
snarky commentators? Was your goal to assist others or to try to bring
someone down to your level?

Strange, that. When I see a message that begins

Post by Zoroaster

Post by z***@zenofzero.net
There seems to be a British saying, "What you lose on the swings you gain
on the roundabouts." The figurative meaning seems to be something like
"It's a wash," or "it's close to an even tradeoff" or "the law of averages
applies" or "it all evens out in the end."
Does anyone know what the origin and _literal_ meaning of the saying is?
Carnival rides, maybe?

I tend to assume that the response is a response to that.

If you'd lurked a bit before posting you'd have known that we get lots
of "answers" from Google Gropers to very old queries. They don't
usually assist anyone, and certainly not the person who asked the
original question. The only thing unusual about your contributions is
that you didn't immediately disappear without trace your first post.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Zoroaster

Post by z***@zenofzero.net

There seems to be a British saying, "What you lose on the swings you gain
on the roundabouts." The figurative meaning seems to be something like
"It's a wash," or "it's close to an even tradeoff" or "the law of averages
applies" or "it all evens out in the end."
Does anyone know what the origin and _literal_ meaning of the saying is?
Carnival rides, maybe?
--
Daniel P. B. Smith

I expect Daniel P. B. Smith has been sitting anxiously in front of his>
computer for 18 years waiting in increasing desperation for your reply.

Post by z***@zenofzero.net
Roundabouts and Swings
by
Patrick R Chalmers
It was early last September nigh to Framlin'am-on-Sea,
An' 'twas Fair-day come to-morrow, an' the time was after tea,
An' I met a painted caravan adown a dusty lane,
A Pharaoh with his waggons comin' jolt an' creak an' strain;
A cheery cove an' sunburnt, bold o' eye and wrinkled up,
An' beside him on the splashboard sat a brindled tarrier pup,
An' a lurcher wise as Solomon an' lean as fiddle-strings
Was joggin' in the dust along 'is roundabouts and swings.
"Goo'-day," said 'e; "Goo'-day," said I; "an' 'ow d'you find things go,
An' what's the chance o' millions when you runs a travellin' show?"
"I find," said 'e, "things very much as 'ow I've always found,
For mostly they goes up and down or else goes round and round."
Said 'e, "The job's the very spit o' what it always were,
It's bread and bacon mostly when the dog don't catch a 'are;
But lookin' at it broad, an' while it ain't no merchant king's,
What's lost upon the roundabouts we pulls up on the swings!"
"Goo' luck," said 'e; "Goo' luck," said I; "you've put it past a doubt;
An' keep that lurcher on the road, the gamekeepers is out."
'E thumped upon the footboard an' 'e lumbered on again
To meet a gold-dust sunset down the owl-light in the lane;
An' the moon she climbed the 'azels, while a night-jar seemed to spin
That Pharaoh's wisdom o'er again, 'is sooth of lose-and-win;
For "up an' down an' round," said 'e, "goes all appointed things,
An' losses on the roundabouts means profits on the swings!"

--
athel

Why do you assume that I was attempting to inform Smith, rather than
(for example) attempting to inform someone else who arrived at this
page via an internet search or (as another example) seeking to identify
snarky commentators? Was your goal to assist others or to try to bring
someone down to your level?

Strange, that. When I see a message that begins

Post by Zoroaster

Post by z***@zenofzero.net
There seems to be a British saying, "What you lose on the swings you gain
on the roundabouts." The figurative meaning seems to be something like
"It's a wash," or "it's close to an even tradeoff" or "the law of averages
applies" or "it all evens out in the end."
Does anyone know what the origin and _literal_ meaning of the saying is?
Carnival rides, maybe?

I tend to assume that the response is a response to that.
If you'd lurked a bit before posting you'd have known that we get lots
of "answers" from Google Gropers

How many times do you have to be told that they are not "Google Gro[u]pers"
but users of Google-powered portable devices, such as (IIRC) Android phones?

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
to very old queries. They don't
usually assist anyone, and certainly not the person who asked the
original question. The only thing unusual about your contributions is
that you didn't immediately disappear without trace your first post.

Which suggests that either this one is _not_ of that origin, or else Google
has improved the Android(?) interface.

[Lewis]

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Zoroaster

Post by z***@zenofzero.net

There seems to be a British saying, "What you lose on the swings you gain
on the roundabouts." The figurative meaning seems to be something like
"It's a wash," or "it's close to an even tradeoff" or "the law of averages
applies" or "it all evens out in the end."
Does anyone know what the origin and _literal_ meaning of the saying is?
Carnival rides, maybe?
--
Daniel P. B. Smith

I expect Daniel P. B. Smith has been sitting anxiously in front of his>
computer for 18 years waiting in increasing desperation for your reply.

Post by z***@zenofzero.net
Roundabouts and Swings
by
Patrick R Chalmers
It was early last September nigh to Framlin'am-on-Sea,
An' 'twas Fair-day come to-morrow, an' the time was after tea,
An' I met a painted caravan adown a dusty lane,
A Pharaoh with his waggons comin' jolt an' creak an' strain;
A cheery cove an' sunburnt, bold o' eye and wrinkled up,
An' beside him on the splashboard sat a brindled tarrier pup,
An' a lurcher wise as Solomon an' lean as fiddle-strings
Was joggin' in the dust along 'is roundabouts and swings.
"Goo'-day," said 'e; "Goo'-day," said I; "an' 'ow d'you find things go,
An' what's the chance o' millions when you runs a travellin' show?"
"I find," said 'e, "things very much as 'ow I've always found,
For mostly they goes up and down or else goes round and round."
Said 'e, "The job's the very spit o' what it always were,
It's bread and bacon mostly when the dog don't catch a 'are;
But lookin' at it broad, an' while it ain't no merchant king's,
What's lost upon the roundabouts we pulls up on the swings!"
"Goo' luck," said 'e; "Goo' luck," said I; "you've put it past a doubt;
An' keep that lurcher on the road, the gamekeepers is out."
'E thumped upon the footboard an' 'e lumbered on again
To meet a gold-dust sunset down the owl-light in the lane;
An' the moon she climbed the 'azels, while a night-jar seemed to spin
That Pharaoh's wisdom o'er again, 'is sooth of lose-and-win;
For "up an' down an' round," said 'e, "goes all appointed things,
An' losses on the roundabouts means profits on the swings!"

--
athel

Why do you assume that I was attempting to inform Smith, rather than
(for example) attempting to inform someone else who arrived at this
page via an internet search or (as another example) seeking to identify
snarky commentators? Was your goal to assist others or to try to bring
someone down to your level?

Strange, that. When I see a message that begins

Post by Zoroaster

Post by z***@zenofzero.net
There seems to be a British saying, "What you lose on the swings you gain
on the roundabouts." The figurative meaning seems to be something like
"It's a wash," or "it's close to an even tradeoff" or "the law of averages
applies" or "it all evens out in the end."
Does anyone know what the origin and _literal_ meaning of the saying is?
Carnival rides, maybe?

I tend to assume that the response is a response to that.

That's not really how USENET works. The reply is certainly prompted by
that, but often replies are not to the post being replyied to. They may
be simply to the general topic, they may be countering a point brought
up in an earlier post, or they may simply be to provide a reply to a
question even if the original poster is long gone.

Granted, the recent screw up by Google in the googlegroups interface
that conceals the age of the post and doesn't provide a "this post is
over 5 years old, are you sure you want to reply?" check makes
resurrected threads more common and therefore more annoying, so there is
that.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Lewis

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Zoroaster

Post by z***@zenofzero.net

There seems to be a British saying, "What you lose on the swings you gain
on the roundabouts." The figurative meaning seems to be something like
"It's a wash," or "it's close to an even tradeoff" or "the law of averages
applies" or "it all evens out in the end."
Does anyone know what the origin and _literal_ meaning of the saying is?
Carnival rides, maybe?
--
Daniel P. B. Smith

I expect Daniel P. B. Smith has been sitting anxiously in front of his>
computer for 18 years waiting in increasing desperation for your reply.

Post by z***@zenofzero.net
Roundabouts and Swings
by
Patrick R Chalmers
It was early last September nigh to Framlin'am-on-Sea,
An' 'twas Fair-day come to-morrow, an' the time was after tea,
An' I met a painted caravan adown a dusty lane,
A Pharaoh with his waggons comin' jolt an' creak an' strain;
A cheery cove an' sunburnt, bold o' eye and wrinkled up,
An' beside him on the splashboard sat a brindled tarrier pup,
An' a lurcher wise as Solomon an' lean as fiddle-strings
Was joggin' in the dust along 'is roundabouts and swings.
"Goo'-day," said 'e; "Goo'-day," said I; "an' 'ow d'you find things go,
An' what's the chance o' millions when you runs a travellin' show?"
"I find," said 'e, "things very much as 'ow I've always found,
For mostly they goes up and down or else goes round and round."
Said 'e, "The job's the very spit o' what it always were,
It's bread and bacon mostly when the dog don't catch a 'are;
But lookin' at it broad, an' while it ain't no merchant king's,
What's lost upon the roundabouts we pulls up on the swings!"
"Goo' luck," said 'e; "Goo' luck," said I; "you've put it past a doubt;
An' keep that lurcher on the road, the gamekeepers is out."
'E thumped upon the footboard an' 'e lumbered on again
To meet a gold-dust sunset down the owl-light in the lane;
An' the moon she climbed the 'azels, while a night-jar seemed to spin
That Pharaoh's wisdom o'er again, 'is sooth of lose-and-win;
For "up an' down an' round," said 'e, "goes all appointed things,
An' losses on the roundabouts means profits on the swings!"

--
athel

Why do you assume that I was attempting to inform Smith, rather than
(for example) attempting to inform someone else who arrived at this
page via an internet search or (as another example) seeking to identify
snarky commentators? Was your goal to assist others or to try to bring
someone down to your level?

Strange, that. When I see a message that begins

Post by Zoroaster

Post by z***@zenofzero.net
There seems to be a British saying, "What you lose on the swings you gain
on the roundabouts." The figurative meaning seems to be something like
"It's a wash," or "it's close to an even tradeoff" or "the law of averages
applies" or "it all evens out in the end."
Does anyone know what the origin and _literal_ meaning of the saying is?
Carnival rides, maybe?

I tend to assume that the response is a response to that.

That's not really how USENET works. The reply is certainly prompted by
that, but often replies are not to the post being replyied to. They may
be simply to the general topic, they may be countering a point brought
up in an earlier post, or they may simply be to provide a reply to a
question even if the original poster is long gone.
Granted, the recent screw up by Google in the googlegroups interface
that conceals the age of the post and doesn't provide a "this post is
over 5 years old, are you sure you want to reply?" check makes
resurrected threads more common and therefore more annoying, so there is
that.

"Recent"? It hasn't done any such thing in 9-10 years.

[Charles Bishop]

Post by Lewis

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Zoroaster

Post by z***@zenofzero.net

There seems to be a British saying, "What you lose on the swings you gain
on the roundabouts." The figurative meaning seems to be something like
"It's a wash," or "it's close to an even tradeoff" or "the law of averages
applies" or "it all evens out in the end."
Does anyone know what the origin and _literal_ meaning of the saying is?
Carnival rides, maybe?
--
Daniel P. B. Smith

I expect Daniel P. B. Smith has been sitting anxiously in front of his>
computer for 18 years waiting in increasing desperation for your reply.

Post by z***@zenofzero.net
Roundabouts and Swings
by
Patrick R Chalmers
It was early last September nigh to Framlin'am-on-Sea,
An' 'twas Fair-day come to-morrow, an' the time was after tea,
An' I met a painted caravan adown a dusty lane,
A Pharaoh with his waggons comin' jolt an' creak an' strain;
A cheery cove an' sunburnt, bold o' eye and wrinkled up,
An' beside him on the splashboard sat a brindled tarrier pup,
An' a lurcher wise as Solomon an' lean as fiddle-strings
Was joggin' in the dust along 'is roundabouts and swings.
"Goo'-day," said 'e; "Goo'-day," said I; "an' 'ow d'you find things go,
An' what's the chance o' millions when you runs a travellin' show?"
"I find," said 'e, "things very much as 'ow I've always found,
For mostly they goes up and down or else goes round and round."
Said 'e, "The job's the very spit o' what it always were,
It's bread and bacon mostly when the dog don't catch a 'are;
But lookin' at it broad, an' while it ain't no merchant king's,
What's lost upon the roundabouts we pulls up on the swings!"
"Goo' luck," said 'e; "Goo' luck," said I; "you've put it past a doubt;
An' keep that lurcher on the road, the gamekeepers is out."
'E thumped upon the footboard an' 'e lumbered on again
To meet a gold-dust sunset down the owl-light in the lane;
An' the moon she climbed the 'azels, while a night-jar seemed to spin
That Pharaoh's wisdom o'er again, 'is sooth of lose-and-win;
For "up an' down an' round," said 'e, "goes all appointed things,
An' losses on the roundabouts means profits on the swings!"

--
athel

Why do you assume that I was attempting to inform Smith, rather than
(for example) attempting to inform someone else who arrived at this
page via an internet search or (as another example) seeking to identify
snarky commentators? Was your goal to assist others or to try to bring
someone down to your level?

Strange, that. When I see a message that begins

Post by Zoroaster

Post by z***@zenofzero.net
There seems to be a British saying, "What you lose on the swings you gain
on the roundabouts." The figurative meaning seems to be something like
"It's a wash," or "it's close to an even tradeoff" or "the law of averages
applies" or "it all evens out in the end."
Does anyone know what the origin and _literal_ meaning of the saying is?
Carnival rides, maybe?

I tend to assume that the response is a response to that.

That's not really how USENET works. The reply is certainly prompted by
that, but often replies are not to the post being replyied to. They may
be simply to the general topic, they may be countering a point brought
up in an earlier post, or they may simply be to provide a reply to a
question even if the original poster is long gone.
Granted, the recent screw up by Google in the googlegroups interface
that conceals the age of the post and doesn't provide a "this post is
over 5 years old, are you sure you want to reply?" check makes
resurrected threads more common and therefore more annoying, so there is
that.

I don't find the resurrected threads annoying. I think most of them are
on usage so they can be an additional source for discussion of English
usage. This one was interesting because I have been confused by swings
and roundabouts for some time and had even invented an explanation that
made sense to me so I could read over the phrase. This explanation is no
doubt without merit.

[Peter Moylan]

Post by Charles Bishop

Post by Lewis
Granted, the recent screw up by Google in the googlegroups interface
that conceals the age of the post and doesn't provide a "this post is
over 5 years old, are you sure you want to reply?" check makes
resurrected threads more common and therefore more annoying, so there is
that.

I don't find the resurrected threads annoying. I think most of them are
on usage so they can be an additional source for discussion of English
usage. This one was interesting because I have been confused by swings
and roundabouts for some time and had even invented an explanation that
made sense to me so I could read over the phrase. This explanation is no
doubt without merit.

Besides, there are some regulars in this group who weren't here in 1997,
and didn't see the original post.

Resurrecting ancient threads is not evil in itself. What makes it
annoying is that it's almost done by drive-by posters who throw in their
pearls of wisdom and then disappear without trace, which is impolite to
say the least. They don't respect the rule that it's traditional to lurk
in a group for a while, to work out what the local traditions are,
before posting, and most of the time they don't even realise that Google
Groups is not Usenet.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Post by Lewis
[ … ]

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Zoroaster
Why do you assume that I was attempting to inform Smith, rather than
(for example) attempting to inform someone else who arrived at this
page via an internet search or (as another example) seeking to identify
snarky commentators? Was your goal to assist others or to try to bring
someone down to your level?

Strange, that. When I see a message that begins

Post by Zoroaster

There seems to be a British saying, "What you lose on the swings you gain
on the roundabouts." The figurative meaning seems to be something like
"It's a wash," or "it's close to an even tradeoff" or "the law of averages
applies" or "it all evens out in the end."
Does anyone know what the origin and _literal_ meaning of the saying is?
Carnival rides, maybe?

I tend to assume that the response is a response to that.

That's not really how USENET works. The reply is certainly prompted by
that, but often replies are not to the post being replyied to. They may
be simply to the general topic, they may be countering a point brought
up in an earlier post, or they may simply be to provide a reply to a
question even if the original poster is long gone.

OK, but even then it would be nice if the responder were to start by
saying: "This is a very old post, but I think it is not without
interest to revive it:"

Post by Lewis
Granted, the recent screw up by Google in the googlegroups interface
that conceals the age of the post and doesn't provide a "this post is
over 5 years old, are you sure you want to reply?" check makes
resurrected threads more common and therefore more annoying, so there is
that.

[Charles Bishop]

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

[ 
 ]

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Zoroaster
Why do you assume that I was attempting to inform Smith, rather than
(for example) attempting to inform someone else who arrived at this
page via an internet search or (as another example) seeking to identify
snarky commentators? Was your goal to assist others or to try to bring
someone down to your level?

Strange, that. When I see a message that begins

Post by Zoroaster

There seems to be a British saying, "What you lose on the swings you gain
on the roundabouts." The figurative meaning seems to be something like
"It's a wash," or "it's close to an even tradeoff" or "the law of averages
applies" or "it all evens out in the end."
Does anyone know what the origin and _literal_ meaning of the saying is?
Carnival rides, maybe?

I tend to assume that the response is a response to that.

That's not really how USENET works. The reply is certainly prompted by
that, but often replies are not to the post being replyied to. They may
be simply to the general topic, they may be countering a point brought
up in an earlier post, or they may simply be to provide a reply to a
question even if the original poster is long gone.

OK, but even then it would be nice if the responder were to start by
saying: "This is a very old post, but I think it is not without
interest to revive it:"

Part of the problem with that may be the reviver may not recognize the
age of the post. If I understand correctly, someone, searching for
information, finds, as one source, a long ago post from aue. They may
not know what USENET is and think they are replying to a current
discussion.

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Granted, the recent screw up by Google in the googlegroups interface
that conceals the age of the post and doesn't provide a "this post is
over 5 years old, are you sure you want to reply?" check makes
resurrected threads more common and therefore more annoying, so there is
that.

What I said.

[Snidely]

Post by z***@zenofzero.net

There seems to be a British saying, "What you lose on the swings you gain
on the roundabouts." The figurative meaning seems to be something like
"It's a wash," or "it's close to an even tradeoff" or "the law of averages
applies" or "it all evens out in the end."
Does anyone know what the origin and _literal_ meaning of the saying is?
Carnival rides, maybe?
--
Daniel P. B. Smith

Roundabouts and Swings
by
Patrick R Chalmers
It was early last September nigh to Framlin'am-on-Sea,
An' 'twas Fair-day come to-morrow, an' the time was after tea,
An' I met a painted caravan adown a dusty lane,
A Pharaoh with his waggons comin' jolt an' creak an' strain;
A cheery cove an' sunburnt, bold o' eye and wrinkled up,
An' beside him on the splashboard sat a brindled tarrier pup,
An' a lurcher wise as Solomon an' lean as fiddle-strings
Was joggin' in the dust along 'is roundabouts and swings.
"Goo'-day," said 'e; "Goo'-day," said I; "an' 'ow d'you find things go,
An' what's the chance o' millions when you runs a travellin' show?"
"I find," said 'e, "things very much as 'ow I've always found,
For mostly they goes up and down or else goes round and round."
Said 'e, "The job's the very spit o' what it always were,
It's bread and bacon mostly when the dog don't catch a 'are;
But lookin' at it broad, an' while it ain't no merchant king's,
What's lost upon the roundabouts we pulls up on the swings!"
"Goo' luck," said 'e; "Goo' luck," said I; "you've put it past a doubt;
An' keep that lurcher on the road, the gamekeepers is out."
'E thumped upon the footboard an' 'e lumbered on again
To meet a gold-dust sunset down the owl-light in the lane;
An' the moon she climbed the 'azels, while a night-jar seemed to spin
That Pharaoh's wisdom o'er again, 'is sooth of lose-and-win;
For "up an' down an' round," said 'e, "goes all appointed things,
An' losses on the roundabouts means profits on the swings!"

This kind of sounds to me like someone taking a common spoken usage and
giving it an appearance in print.

Also, the images in the poem are getting awfully dusty these days.
"Sitting on the splashboard" suggests horse-drawn. Waggons (myE:
wagons) is plural but were they pulled by one team (and thus a limit of
one or two connections) or were there separate teams with silent
drivers on board? What does a waggon of swings and roundabouts look
like?

These days, the carnival rides I encountner move on trucks (1 truck per
ride, usually), the merry-go-round has a superstructure even if the
calliope is electronic, and swings would now be a capsule that rocks to
and then through an inverted vertical position. There will be at least
5 "kiddie rides", like little trucks followig a track, and maybe a
centipede that goes over little hills, and lately a bounce house or a
ball pool (plastic boalls about orange or grapefruit size). There may
be a slide race.

The bigger kids will ride The Hammer, or a bigger slide race, and the
Twirler with 3 arms each with 3 pods, and maybe a ferris wheel or a
drop ride. Oh, I forgot the Drum, where you get spun fast enough to be
stuck on the outside wall when they drop the floor.

All those trucks mean a lot of drivers, who are mostly the carnies
taking your tickets.

/dps

[Snidely]

Post by Snidely

Post by z***@zenofzero.net

There seems to be a British saying, "What you lose on the swings you gain
on the roundabouts." The figurative meaning seems to be something like
"It's a wash," or "it's close to an even tradeoff" or "the law of averages
applies" or "it all evens out in the end."
Does anyone know what the origin and _literal_ meaning of the saying is?
Carnival rides, maybe?
-- Daniel P. B. Smith

Roundabouts and Swings
by Patrick R Chalmers
It was early last September nigh to Framlin'am-on-Sea,
An' 'twas Fair-day come to-morrow, an' the time was after tea,
An' I met a painted caravan adown a dusty lane,
A Pharaoh with his waggons comin' jolt an' creak an' strain;
A cheery cove an' sunburnt, bold o' eye and wrinkled up,
An' beside him on the splashboard sat a brindled tarrier pup,
An' a lurcher wise as Solomon an' lean as fiddle-strings
Was joggin' in the dust along 'is roundabouts and swings.
"Goo'-day," said 'e; "Goo'-day," said I; "an' 'ow d'you find things go,
An' what's the chance o' millions when you runs a travellin' show?"
"I find," said 'e, "things very much as 'ow I've always found,
For mostly they goes up and down or else goes round and round."
Said 'e, "The job's the very spit o' what it always were,
It's bread and bacon mostly when the dog don't catch a 'are;
But lookin' at it broad, an' while it ain't no merchant king's,
What's lost upon the roundabouts we pulls up on the swings!"
"Goo' luck," said 'e; "Goo' luck," said I; "you've put it past a doubt;
An' keep that lurcher on the road, the gamekeepers is out."
'E thumped upon the footboard an' 'e lumbered on again
To meet a gold-dust sunset down the owl-light in the lane;
An' the moon she climbed the 'azels, while a night-jar seemed to spin
That Pharaoh's wisdom o'er again, 'is sooth of lose-and-win;
For "up an' down an' round," said 'e, "goes all appointed things,
An' losses on the roundabouts means profits on the swings!"

This kind of sounds to me like someone taking a common spoken usage and
giving it an appearance in print.
Also, the images in the poem are getting awfully dusty these days. "Sitting
on the splashboard" suggests horse-drawn. Waggons (myE: wagons) is plural
but were they pulled by one team (and thus a limit of one or two connections)
or were there separate teams with silent drivers on board? What does a
waggon of swings and roundabouts look like?
These days, the carnival rides I encountner move on trucks (1 truck per ride,
usually), the merry-go-round has a superstructure even if the calliope is
electronic, and swings would now be a capsule that rocks to and then through
an inverted vertical position. There will be at least 5 "kiddie rides", like
little trucks followig a track, and maybe a centipede that goes over little
hills, and lately a bounce house or a ball pool (plastic boalls about orange
or grapefruit size). There may be a slide race.
The bigger kids will ride The Hammer, or a bigger slide race, and the Twirler
with 3 arms each with 3 pods, and maybe a ferris wheel or a drop ride. Oh, I
forgot the Drum, where you get spun fast enough to be stuck on the outside
wall when they drop the floor.
All those trucks mean a lot of drivers, who are mostly the carnies taking
your tickets.

As a special holiday treat for would-be editors, I have provided some
sample material.

/dps

[Zoroaster]

Post by Snidely

Post by Snidely

Post by z***@zenofzero.net

There seems to be a British saying, "What you lose on the swings you gain
on the roundabouts." The figurative meaning seems to be something like
"It's a wash," or "it's close to an even tradeoff" or "the law of averages
applies" or "it all evens out in the end."
Does anyone know what the origin and _literal_ meaning of the saying is?
Carnival rides, maybe?
-- Daniel P. B. Smith

Roundabouts and Swings
by Patrick R Chalmers
It was early last September nigh to Framlin'am-on-Sea,
An' 'twas Fair-day come to-morrow, an' the time was after tea,
An' I met a painted caravan adown a dusty lane,
A Pharaoh with his waggons comin' jolt an' creak an' strain;
A cheery cove an' sunburnt, bold o' eye and wrinkled up,
An' beside him on the splashboard sat a brindled tarrier pup,
An' a lurcher wise as Solomon an' lean as fiddle-strings
Was joggin' in the dust along 'is roundabouts and swings.
"Goo'-day," said 'e; "Goo'-day," said I; "an' 'ow d'you find things go,
An' what's the chance o' millions when you runs a travellin' show?"
"I find," said 'e, "things very much as 'ow I've always found,
For mostly they goes up and down or else goes round and round."
Said 'e, "The job's the very spit o' what it always were,
It's bread and bacon mostly when the dog don't catch a 'are;
But lookin' at it broad, an' while it ain't no merchant king's,
What's lost upon the roundabouts we pulls up on the swings!"
"Goo' luck," said 'e; "Goo' luck," said I; "you've put it past a doubt;
An' keep that lurcher on the road, the gamekeepers is out."
'E thumped upon the footboard an' 'e lumbered on again
To meet a gold-dust sunset down the owl-light in the lane;
An' the moon she climbed the 'azels, while a night-jar seemed to spin
That Pharaoh's wisdom o'er again, 'is sooth of lose-and-win;
For "up an' down an' round," said 'e, "goes all appointed things,
An' losses on the roundabouts means profits on the swings!"

This kind of sounds to me like someone taking a common spoken usage and
giving it an appearance in print.
Also, the images in the poem are getting awfully dusty these days. "Sitting
on the splashboard" suggests horse-drawn. Waggons (myE: wagons) is plural
but were they pulled by one team (and thus a limit of one or two connections)
or were there separate teams with silent drivers on board? What does a
waggon of swings and roundabouts look like?
These days, the carnival rides I encountner move on trucks (1 truck per ride,
usually), the merry-go-round has a superstructure even if the calliope is
electronic, and swings would now be a capsule that rocks to and then through
an inverted vertical position. There will be at least 5 "kiddie rides", like
little trucks followig a track, and maybe a centipede that goes over little
hills, and lately a bounce house or a ball pool (plastic boalls about orange
or grapefruit size). There may be a slide race.
The bigger kids will ride The Hammer, or a bigger slide race, and the Twirler
with 3 arms each with 3 pods, and maybe a ferris wheel or a drop ride. Oh, I
forgot the Drum, where you get spun fast enough to be stuck on the outside
wall when they drop the floor.
All those trucks mean a lot of drivers, who are mostly the carnies taking
your tickets.

As a special holiday treat for would-be editors, I have provided some
sample material.
/dps
--
The presence of this syntax results from the fact that SQLite is really
a Tcl extension that has escaped into the wild.
<http://www.sqlite.org/lang_expr.html>

Gees, this is a strange group / forum! I'll just mention how I arrived here and then leave.

A week-or-so ago, I tried to console my (grown) daughter with the phrase that my (Irish) mother would say to me in similar circumstances, more than 60 years ago: "What you lose upon the roundabouts, you gain upon the swings."

I was surprised when my daughter responded, "Whaddya mean?" So, after commenting on the sad state of American education, I tried to explain the meaning and then searched on the internet for the (~ century) old poem in which the phrase first appeared (and which I had read in school when I was a kid): the quoted poem by (the Irishman!) Chalmers, which I consider to be one of the greatest poems ever written. Seeking further information for my daughter, I then searched further on the internet, leading me to this site (among many other sites).

Here, I was surprised to see that so many posters not only didn't know the source (although one did!) but also confused the issue (such as the post I've quoted here). I thought I might be able to help future searchers if I displayed the (beautiful) poem by Chalmers. I was then disappointed that someone (Athel) just responded with a snarky comment, making me feel like an unwelcome guest. Well, fine: I don't want to join any group (if that's what this is); all I wanted to do was set the record straight -- maybe for some other father trying to help his daughter.

[Katy Jennison]

Post by Snidely

Post by z***@zenofzero.net

There seems to be a British saying, "What you lose on the swings you gain
on the roundabouts." The figurative meaning seems to be something like
"It's a wash," or "it's close to an even tradeoff" or "the law of averages
applies" or "it all evens out in the end."
Does anyone know what the origin and _literal_ meaning of the saying is?
Carnival rides, maybe?
-- Daniel P. B. Smith

Roundabouts and Swings
by Patrick R Chalmers

{Lots snipped]

Post by Snidely
As a special holiday treat for would-be editors, I have provided some
sample material.
The presence of this syntax results from the fact that SQLite is really
a Tcl extension that has escaped into the wild.
<http://www.sqlite.org/lang_expr.html>

Gees, this is a strange group / forum! I'll just mention how I arrived hereand then leave.
A week-or-so ago, I tried to console my (grown) daughter with the phrase that my (Irish) mother would say to me in similar circumstances, more than 60 years ago: "What you lose upon the roundabouts, you gain upon the swings."
I was surprised when my daughter responded, "Whaddya mean?" So, after commenting on the sad state of American education, I tried to explain the meaning and then searched on the internet for the (~ century) old poem in which the phrase first appeared (and which I had read in school when I was a kid): the quoted poem by (the Irishman!) Chalmers, which I consider to be one of the greatest poems ever written. Seeking further information for my daughter, I then searched further on the internet, leading me to this site (among many other sites).
Here, I was surprised to see that so many posters not only didn't know the source (although one did!) but also confused the issue (such as the post I've quoted here). I thought I might be able to help future searchers if I displayed the (beautiful) poem by Chalmers. I was then disappointed that someone (Athel) just responded with a snarky comment, making me feel like an unwelcome guest. Well, fine: I don't want to join any group (if that's what this is); all I wanted to do was set the record straight -- maybe for some other father trying to help his daughter.

Don't feel you have to disappear. There are things you need to know
about this group, though, in order to make sense of what's happening.

One is that every now and again a post (a message) will re-surface from
several years back (in this case, from 1997), and sometimes people reply
to it without noticing the date, and as if they expected the original
questioner to be still hanging around waiting for a reply. That often
draws the equivalent of laughter from other people who did notice the
date. So if you're picking up on an old post which has current
relevance, it's wise to add a sentence or two of explanation (which of
course you've now done).

Second, many of the people who post in this group have been posting for
some years, and so they know each other fairly well (in an on-line
sense). There's a certain amount of banter and in-joking.

Third, the original topic, which appears in the Subject line, may be no
guide at all to the current subject of a particular thread. Like any
real-life conversation, ideas trigger different ideas and the discussion
goes off at a tangent, as a train of thought does. Regular posters (and
presumably regular lurkers) value the twists and turns of discussion and
argument, and learn to ignore threads which aren't interesting to them.

Fourth, there are contributors here from all over the world, and it's
also fascinating (to some of us) to find out about the differences of
meaning which different countries assign to the same English word, and
by extension to find out more about their culture and customs.

Fifth, some contributors are among the top scholars in their field;
others of us are amateurs (in both senses of the word).

And finally, there are a few personal animosities between particular
individuals here, as there are in any group of people: don't take it
personally!

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Post by Katy Jennison

Post by Zoroaster

Post by Snidely

Post by z***@zenofzero.net

There seems to be a British saying, "What you lose on the swings you gain
on the roundabouts." The figurative meaning seems to be something like
"It's a wash," or "it's close to an even tradeoff" or "the law of averages
applies" or "it all evens out in the end."
Does anyone know what the origin and _literal_ meaning of the saying is?
Carnival rides, maybe?
-- Daniel P. B. Smith

Roundabouts and Swings
by Patrick R Chalmers

{Lots snipped]

Post by Zoroaster

Post by Snidely
As a special holiday treat for would-be editors, I have provided some
sample material.
The presence of this syntax results from the fact that SQLite is really
a Tcl extension that has escaped into the wild.
<http://www.sqlite.org/lang_expr.html>

Gees, this is a strange group / forum! I'll just mention how I arrived
hereand then leave.
A week-or-so ago, I tried to console my (grown) daughter with the
phrase that my (Irish) mother would say to me in similar circumstances,
more than 60 years ago: "What you lose upon the roundabouts, you gain
upon the swings."
I was surprised when my daughter responded, "Whaddya mean?" So, after
commenting on the sad state of American education, I tried to explain
the meaning and then searched on the internet for the (~ century) old
poem in which the phrase first appeared (and which I had read in school
when I was a kid): the quoted poem by (the Irishman!) Chalmers, which
I consider to be one of the greatest poems ever written. Seeking
further information for my daughter, I then searched further on the
internet, leading me to this site (among many other sites).
Here, I was surprised to see that so many posters not only didn't know
the source (although one did!) but also confused the issue (such as the
post I've quoted here). I thought I might be able to help future
searchers if I displayed the (beautiful) poem by Chalmers. I was then
disappointed that someone (Athel) just responded with a snarky comment,
making me feel like an unwelcome guest. Well, fine: I don't want to
join any group (if that's what this is); all I wanted to do was set the
record straight -- maybe for some other father trying to help his
daughter.

Thanks for these comments, Katie. I agree with all of them, but I have

Post by Katy Jennison
Don't feel you have to disappear. There are things you need to know
about this group, though, in order to make sense of what's happening.
One is that every now and again a post (a message) will re-surface from
several years back (in this case, from 1997), and sometimes people
reply to it without noticing the date, and as if they expected the
original questioner to be still hanging around waiting for a reply.
That often draws the equivalent of laughter from other people who did
notice the date. So if you're picking up on an old post which has
current relevance, it's wise to add a sentence or two of explanation
(which of course you've now done).
Second, many of the people who post in this group have been posting for
some years, and so they know each other fairly well (in an on-line
sense). There's a certain amount of banter and in-joking.
Third, the original topic, which appears in the Subject line, may be no
guide at all to the current subject of a particular thread. Like any
real-life conversation, ideas trigger different ideas and the
discussion goes off at a tangent, as a train of thought does. Regular
posters (and presumably regular lurkers) value the twists and turns of
discussion and argument, and learn to ignore threads which aren't
interesting to them.

Wandering off topic is, of course, very common, but it doesn't usually
start with the very first reply. Lewis was saying upthread that I was
wrong to say that just because a post is presented as a reply to a
question doesn't mean that it is a reply to that question, but it
nearly all cases, it is. I have just check 20 recent threads, and in 19
of them the first reponse was clearly responding to the first post. The
exception ("The date of a piece of information") may not be an
exception because I only have a small part of the first reponse, or it
may just be because it comes from Stefan.

Post by Katy Jennison
Fourth, there are contributors here from all over the world, and it's
also fascinating (to some of us) to find out about the differences of
meaning which different countries assign to the same English word, and
by extension to find out more about their culture and customs.
Fifth, some contributors are among the top scholars in their field;
others of us are amateurs (in both senses of the word).
And finally, there are a few personal animosities between particular
individuals here, as there are in any group of people: don't take it
personally!

I'm interested to see that you count "second, third, fourth, fifth,
finally", because that's what I do, but I think most people don't. I
was told WIWAL that one should say "first, secondly, thirdly …", but I
always thought that was ridiculous, and that if I couldn't add -ly to
"first" I wouldn't add it to the others either.

[Katy Jennison]

[Lots snipped]

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by Katy Jennison
Fourth, there are contributors here from all over the world, and it's
also fascinating (to some of us) to find out about the differences of
meaning which different countries assign to the same English word, and
by extension to find out more about their culture and customs.
Fifth, some contributors are among the top scholars in their field;
others of us are amateurs (in both senses of the word).
And finally, there are a few personal animosities between particular
individuals here, as there are in any group of people: don't take it
personally!

I'm interested to see that you count "second, third, fourth, fifth,
finally", because that's what I do, but I think most people don't. I was
told WIWAL that one should say "first, secondly, thirdly …", but I
always thought that was ridiculous, and that if I couldn't add -ly to
"first" I wouldn't add it to the others either.

I don't think I ever heard that instruction, and in this case I didn't
give it any thought, but I agree that I wouldn't be likely to say
"thirdly", "fourthly", etc, purely because it sounds both unnecessary
and less euphonious. But ... "finally"? No-one would say "final" in
this context. Contrariwise, I might equally have chosen "last" but not
"lastly". Hmm.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Zoroaster
A week-or-so ago, I tried to console my (grown) daughter with the phrase that my (Irish) mother would say to me in similar circumstances, more than 60 years ago: "What you lose upon the roundabouts, you gain upon the swings."

It was discussed here a lot more recently than 1997, when various Brits
insisted that it referred to playground equipment rather than to the
explanation I was given when I first heard the expression (not part
of American English) that "roundabouts" are 'traffic circles' (what you
call "rotaries") and "swings" are straight parts of roads.

I don't recall that anyone mentioned a poem. The one you quote above is
so crammed with alien vocabulary as to be all but incomprehensible,
and doesn't illuminate the literal meaning of the phrase. As Snidely,
also American, suggests, it looks like it might be an attempt at a "folk
etymology" of a familiar but opaque phrase (what do you suppose is the
background of "raining cats and dogs"?)

Post by Zoroaster
I was surprised when my daughter responded, "Whaddya mean?" So, after commenting on the sad state of American education, I tried to explain the meaning and then searched on the internet for the (~ century) old poem in which the phrase first appeared (and which I had read in school when I was a kid): the quoted poem by (the Irishman!) Chalmers, which I consider to be one of the greatest poems ever written. Seeking further information for my daughter, I then searched further on the internet, leading me to this site (among many other sites).
Here, I was surprised to see that so many posters not only didn't know the source (although one did!) but also confused the issue (such as the post I've quoted here). I thought I might be able to help future searchers if I displayed the (beautiful) poem by Chalmers. I was then disappointed that someone (Athel) just responded with a snarky comment, making me feel like an unwelcome guest. Well, fine: I don't want to join any group (if that's what this is); all I wanted to do was set the record straight -- maybe for some other father trying to help his daughter.

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

On Sun, 27 Dec 2015 06:14:46 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Zoroaster
A week-or-so ago, I tried to console my (grown) daughter with the phrase that my (Irish) mother would say to me in similar circumstances, more than 60 years ago: "What you lose upon the roundabouts, you gain upon the swings."

It was discussed here a lot more recently than 1997, when various Brits
insisted that it referred to playground equipment rather than to the
explanation I was given when I first heard the expression (not part
of American English) that "roundabouts" are 'traffic circles' (what you
call "rotaries") and "swings" are straight parts of roads.

There were good reasons for that insistence by Brits.

The swings-and-roundabouts phrase predates the use of "roundabout" for a
traffic circle by some years.

OED:

roundabout, n. and adj.

4. orig. and chiefly Brit.
a. A revolving machine or apparatus on which people (esp. children)
may ride for amusement, spec. one in a fairground or playground;
= merry-go-round n. 1.
to gain on the swings and lose on the roundabouts: see swing n.2
11b.
1763 Brit. Mag. 4 50 There was a round-about for children to
ride in, and all sorts of toys sold as at other fairs.
1795 C. Este Journey through Flanders 53 There is a round-about
as in the apparatus for second childhood at Chantilli.
....

swing, n.2

11.
b. Colloq. phr. to gain on the swings and lose on the roundabouts
and varr., according to which one's losses in one quarter balance
one's gains in another. Also allusively.

1912 P. R. Chalmers Green Days & Blue Days 20 For ‘up an' down
an' round,’ said 'e, goes all appointed things, An' losses on the
roundabouts means profits on the swings!
....
That refers to swings and roundabouts in a fairground (carnival rides)
in which customers pay per ride on the swing or roundabout.

merry-go-round, n. and adj.

A. n.
1.
a. An amusement at a fairground or similar entertainment, consisting
of a large revolving mechanism with model horses, cars, etc., on
which people (esp. children) ride round and round (sometimes also
up and down), often to musical accompaniment; a carousel.

Back to "roundabout":

8. orig. and chiefly Brit. A junction of several roads consisting of
a central (usually circular) island around which traffic moves in
one direction.
Vehicular roundabouts developed from large-scale circuses or
rond-points in France and America (cf. rond-point n. 1). Typically
smaller in size, British roundabouts are sometimes distinguished
from similar junctions by the rule in which oncoming traffic must
give way to traffic moving around the central island. traffic
circle and rotary are the more common terms in America

1926 Times 27 Apr. 17/5 A protest should be made..against the
uncouth, Latinese word ‘gyratory’ to express the new traffic
arrangements... Why not use the simple English word ‘round-about’?
1926 Times 02 Nov. 18 (heading) Marble Arch roundabout.
....

[Katy Jennison]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Zoroaster
A week-or-so ago, I tried to console my (grown) daughter with the phrase that my (Irish) mother would say to me in similar circumstances, more than 60 years ago: "What you lose upon the roundabouts, you gain upon the swings."

It was discussed here a lot more recently than 1997, when various Brits
insisted that it referred to playground equipment rather than to the
explanation I was given when I first heard the expression (not part
of American English) that "roundabouts" are 'traffic circles' (what you
call "rotaries") and "swings" are straight parts of roads.

Playground, or fair-ground. In the old days, swing-boats, and the big
roundabouts with horses going up and down - called carousels in the US
and,increasingly, here in the UK.

Post by Peter T. Daniels
I don't recall that anyone mentioned a poem. The one you quote above is
so crammed with alien vocabulary as to be all but incomprehensible,
and doesn't illuminate the literal meaning of the phrase.

No? The main character is a travelling showman who takes his set of
swings and his roundabout with him and sets it up for a day or two at
fairs in towns and villages, where people come and pay for rides. And
if, at one location, not many are interested in swinging on the swings,
the chances are that the roundabouts will do well, and vice versa.

What I'm not entirely convinced of, however, is that the poem is the
origin of the saying, though I see Wikipedia thinks it is. I've known
the saying since my childhood (I was born the year Chalmers died), but I
haven't met the poem until now. But here's a website about Chalmers and
the relevance of the poem to his other profession of banking:

http://interestingliterature.com/2015/09/03/the-interesting-origins-of-the-phrase-swings-and-roundabouts/

As Snidely,

Post by Peter T. Daniels
also American, suggests, it looks like it might be an attempt at a "folk
etymology" of a familiar but opaque phrase (what do you suppose is the
background of "raining cats and dogs"?)

Post by Zoroaster
I was surprised when my daughter responded, "Whaddya mean?" So, after commenting on the sad state of American education, I tried to explain the meaning and then searched on the internet for the (~ century) old poem in which the phrase first appeared (and which I had read in school when I was a kid): the quoted poem by (the Irishman!) Chalmers, which I consider to be one of the greatest poems ever written. Seeking further information for my daughter, I then searched further on the internet, leading me to this site (among many other sites).
Here, I was surprised to see that so many posters not only didn't know the source (although one did!) but also confused the issue (such as the post I've quoted here). I thought I might be able to help future searchers if I displayed the (beautiful) poem by Chalmers. I was then disappointed that someone (Athel) just responded with a snarky comment, making me feel like an unwelcome guest. Well, fine: I don't want to join any group (if that's what this is); all I wanted to do was set the record straight -- maybe for some other father trying to help his daughter.

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

On Sun, 27 Dec 2015 16:39:47 +0000, Katy Jennison

Post by Katy Jennison

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Zoroaster
A week-or-so ago, I tried to console my (grown) daughter with the phrase that my (Irish) mother would say to me in similar circumstances, more than 60 years ago: "What you lose upon the roundabouts, you gain upon the swings."

It was discussed here a lot more recently than 1997, when various Brits
insisted that it referred to playground equipment rather than to the
explanation I was given when I first heard the expression (not part
of American English) that "roundabouts" are 'traffic circles' (what you
call "rotaries") and "swings" are straight parts of roads.

Playground, or fair-ground. In the old days, swing-boats, and the big
roundabouts with horses going up and down - called carousels in the US
and,increasingly, here in the UK.

Post by Peter T. Daniels
I don't recall that anyone mentioned a poem. The one you quote above is
so crammed with alien vocabulary as to be all but incomprehensible,
and doesn't illuminate the literal meaning of the phrase.

No? The main character is a travelling showman who takes his set of
swings and his roundabout with him and sets it up for a day or two at
fairs in towns and villages, where people come and pay for rides. And
if, at one location, not many are interested in swinging on the swings,
the chances are that the roundabouts will do well, and vice versa.
What I'm not entirely convinced of, however, is that the poem is the
origin of the saying, though I see Wikipedia thinks it is. I've known
the saying since my childhood (I was born the year Chalmers died), but I
haven't met the poem until now. But here's a website about Chalmers and
http://interestingliterature.com/2015/09/03/the-interesting-origins-of-the-phrase-swings-and-roundabouts/

An obvious difficulty with accepting that poem as the origin of the
saying is that the saying could have been in use in the enclosed world
of itinerant showmen for years before it escaped into the wider world
via the poem.

[David Kleinecke]

Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
On Sun, 27 Dec 2015 16:39:47 +0000, Katy Jennison

Post by Katy Jennison

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Zoroaster
A week-or-so ago, I tried to console my (grown) daughter with the phrase that my (Irish) mother would say to me in similar circumstances, more than 60 years ago: "What you lose upon the roundabouts, you gain upon the swings."

It was discussed here a lot more recently than 1997, when various Brits
insisted that it referred to playground equipment rather than to the
explanation I was given when I first heard the expression (not part
of American English) that "roundabouts" are 'traffic circles' (what you
call "rotaries") and "swings" are straight parts of roads.

Playground, or fair-ground. In the old days, swing-boats, and the big
roundabouts with horses going up and down - called carousels in the US
and,increasingly, here in the UK.

Post by Peter T. Daniels
I don't recall that anyone mentioned a poem. The one you quote above is
so crammed with alien vocabulary as to be all but incomprehensible,
and doesn't illuminate the literal meaning of the phrase.

No? The main character is a travelling showman who takes his set of
swings and his roundabout with him and sets it up for a day or two at
fairs in towns and villages, where people come and pay for rides. And
if, at one location, not many are interested in swinging on the swings,
the chances are that the roundabouts will do well, and vice versa.
What I'm not entirely convinced of, however, is that the poem is the
origin of the saying, though I see Wikipedia thinks it is. I've known
the saying since my childhood (I was born the year Chalmers died), but I
haven't met the poem until now. But here's a website about Chalmers and
http://interestingliterature.com/2015/09/03/the-interesting-origins-of-the-phrase-swings-and-roundabouts/

An obvious difficulty with accepting that poem as the origin of the
saying is that the saying could have been in use in the enclosed world
of itinerant showmen for years before it escaped into the wider world
via the poem.

Whatever the origin of the saying it hadn't reached California in my youth.
The carnies came through and we kids did the rides. But none of the rides
we rode were called "swings" and none "roundabouts".

And I never heard of Chalmers before or saw that poem.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Katy Jennison

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Zoroaster
A week-or-so ago, I tried to console my (grown) daughter with the phrase that my (Irish) mother would say to me in similar circumstances, more than 60 years ago: "What you lose upon the roundabouts, you gain upon the swings."

It was discussed here a lot more recently than 1997, when various Brits
insisted that it referred to playground equipment rather than to the
explanation I was given when I first heard the expression (not part
of American English) that "roundabouts" are 'traffic circles' (what you
call "rotaries") and "swings" are straight parts of roads.

Playground, or fair-ground. In the old days, swing-boats, and the big
roundabouts with horses going up and down - called carousels in the US
and,increasingly, here in the UK.

Post by Peter T. Daniels
I don't recall that anyone mentioned a poem. The one you quote above is
so crammed with alien vocabulary as to be all but incomprehensible,
and doesn't illuminate the literal meaning of the phrase.

No? The main character is a travelling showman who takes his set of
swings and his roundabout with him and sets it up for a day or two at
fairs in towns and villages, where people come and pay for rides. And
if, at one location, not many are interested in swinging on the swings,
the chances are that the roundabouts will do well, and vice versa.

As I said, none of that is apparent to someone who doesn't know the areal,
social, and professional jargon deployed in the doggerel.

Post by Katy Jennison
What I'm not entirely convinced of, however, is that the poem is the
origin of the saying, though I see Wikipedia thinks it is. I've known
the saying since my childhood (I was born the year Chalmers died), but I
haven't met the poem until now. But here's a website about Chalmers and
http://interestingliterature.com/2015/09/03/the-interesting-origins-of-the-phrase-swings-and-roundabouts/

[Isabelle C]

Le 27/12/2015 17:39, Katy Jennison a écrit :
[about Chalmers's poem as the origin of the saying "What you lose on the
swings you gain on the roundabouts"]

Post by Katy Jennison
What I'm not entirely convinced of, however, is that the poem is the
origin of the saying, though I see Wikipedia thinks it is. I've known
the saying since my childhood (I was born the year Chalmers died), but I
haven't met the poem until now. But here's a website about Chalmers and
http://interestingliterature.com/2015/09/03/the-interesting-origins-of-the-phrase-swings-and-roundabouts/

Searching books.google for occurences of "gain on the roundabouts" or
some of its variations, with "made", "made up", "gained" and so on
before 1912, the date of publication of Chalmers's poem, has proved
quite infuriating as Google mostly provides snippets, which for the main
part seem to come from rather technical publications, and which are
difficult to decipher.

Two quotes which I found interesting and which both predate Chalmers's poem:

The first one is to be found in Fore's Sporting Notes & Sketches,
published in 1907
http://www.forgottenbooks.com/readbook_text/Fores_Sporting_Notes_Sketches_v10_1000518999/301

"It should be possible for a racecourse to pay its way, even if a
sovereign only were charged to cover all admission expenses, and
probably less than that. What would be lost on the swings would be
gained on the roundabouts"

The second quote is taken from Via Rhodesia; a journey through Southern
Africa, by Charlotte Mansfield, published in 1911. It's on page 77. The
author describes Salisbury:

"In Salisbury what one loses on the cocoanut shies one makes up on the
roundabouts; one may complain of the unnecessary space between the
public buildings for a busy man or woman, but no one can find fault wuth
the delightful sports grounds..."

I don't know if the "cocoanut shies" is Charlotte Mansfield's own
invention or if, as I suspect, it is an alternative version of the
saying as we know it and which she repeated.

I'd say we're firmly on carnival ground here.

[Janet]

Post by Isabelle C
[about Chalmers's poem as the origin of the saying "What you lose on the
swings you gain on the roundabouts"]

Post by Katy Jennison
What I'm not entirely convinced of, however, is that the poem is the
origin of the saying, though I see Wikipedia thinks it is. I've known
the saying since my childhood (I was born the year Chalmers died), but I
haven't met the poem until now. But here's a website about Chalmers and
http://interestingliterature.com/2015/09/03/the-interesting-origins-of-the-phrase-swings-and-roundabouts/

Searching books.google for occurences of "gain on the roundabouts" or
some of its variations, with "made", "made up", "gained" and so on
before 1912, the date of publication of Chalmers's poem, has proved
quite infuriating as Google mostly provides snippets, which for the main
part seem to come from rather technical publications, and which are
difficult to decipher.
The first one is to be found in Fore's Sporting Notes & Sketches,
published in 1907
http://www.forgottenbooks.com/readbook_text/Fores_Sporting_Notes_Sketches_v10_1000518999/301
"It should be possible for a racecourse to pay its way, even if a
sovereign only were charged to cover all admission expenses, and
probably less than that. What would be lost on the swings would be
gained on the roundabouts"
The second quote is taken from Via Rhodesia; a journey through Southern
Africa, by Charlotte Mansfield, published in 1911. It's on page 77. The
"In Salisbury what one loses on the cocoanut shies one makes up on the
roundabouts; one may complain of the unnecessary space between the
public buildings for a busy man or woman, but no one can find fault wuth
the delightful sports grounds..."
I don't know if the "cocoanut shies" is Charlotte Mansfield's own
invention or if, as I suspect, it is an alternative version of the
saying as we know it and which she repeated.
I'd say we're firmly on carnival ground here.

Coconut shies are a classic component of travelling fairgrounds in UK
Coconuts are balanced on a stand, you pay to try to knock them off by
throwing (shying) a ball. In my childhood, if you knocked off a coconut
you could either win the coconut or a live goldfish.

Janet.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Janet

Post by Isabelle C
[about Chalmers's poem as the origin of the saying "What you lose on the
swings you gain on the roundabouts"]

Post by Katy Jennison
What I'm not entirely convinced of, however, is that the poem is the
origin of the saying, though I see Wikipedia thinks it is. I've known
the saying since my childhood (I was born the year Chalmers died), but I
haven't met the poem until now. But here's a website about Chalmers and
http://interestingliterature.com/2015/09/03/the-interesting-origins-of-the-phrase-swings-and-roundabouts/

Searching books.google for occurences of "gain on the roundabouts" or
some of its variations, with "made", "made up", "gained" and so on
before 1912, the date of publication of Chalmers's poem, has proved
quite infuriating as Google mostly provides snippets, which for the main
part seem to come from rather technical publications, and which are
difficult to decipher.

But search "lose on the roundabouts," because you go slower when driving
around a traffic circle than when driving on a straightaway. That's probably
how an American would say it because that's the explanation we were given
for the quaint British expression.

Plus, the prosody is better: ending on a single strong syllable rather than
two weak syllables of a three-syllable word.

Post by Janet

Post by Isabelle C
The first one is to be found in Fore's Sporting Notes & Sketches,
published in 1907
http://www.forgottenbooks.com/readbook_text/Fores_Sporting_Notes_Sketches_v10_1000518999/301
"It should be possible for a racecourse to pay its way, even if a
sovereign only were charged to cover all admission expenses, and
probably less than that. What would be lost on the swings would be
gained on the roundabouts"

literal.

Post by Janet

Post by Isabelle C
The second quote is taken from Via Rhodesia; a journey through Southern
Africa, by Charlotte Mansfield, published in 1911. It's on page 77. The
"In Salisbury what one loses on the cocoanut shies one makes up on the
roundabouts; one may complain of the unnecessary space between the
public buildings for a busy man or woman, but no one can find fault wuth
the delightful sports grounds..."
I don't know if the "cocoanut shies" is Charlotte Mansfield's own
invention or if, as I suspect, it is an alternative version of the
saying as we know it and which she repeated.
I'd say we're firmly on carnival ground here.

again, literal. But why would it have escaped into proverbial use?

Post by Janet
Coconut shies are a classic component of travelling fairgrounds in UK
Coconuts are balanced on a stand, you pay to try to knock them off by
throwing (shying) a ball. In my childhood, if you knocked off a coconut
you could either win the coconut or a live goldfish.

Take the coconunt. It'll last longer.

[Intertextuality.]

[James Hogg]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Isabelle C
Searching books.google for occurences of "gain on the
roundabouts" or some of its variations, with "made", "made up",
"gained" and so on before 1912, the date of publication of
Chalmers's poem, has proved quite infuriating as Google mostly
provides snippets, which for the main part seem to come from
rather technical publications, and which are difficult to
decipher.

But search "lose on the roundabouts," because you go slower when
driving around a traffic circle than when driving on a straightaway.
That's probably how an American would say it because that's the
explanation we were given for the quaint British expression.

That folk etymology is wrong and you should forget you ever heard it.
Peter Duncanson has shown that the fairground saying existed well before
any vehicle ever had to slow down to negotiate a roundabout, and
Isabelle's examples confirm the primacy of the fairground context.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Isabelle C
Searching books.google for occurences of "gain on the
roundabouts" or some of its variations, with "made", "made up",
"gained" and so on before 1912, the date of publication of
Chalmers's poem, has proved quite infuriating as Google mostly
provides snippets, which for the main part seem to come from
rather technical publications, and which are difficult to
decipher.

But search "lose on the roundabouts," because you go slower when
driving around a traffic circle than when driving on a straightaway.
That's probably how an American would say it because that's the
explanation we were given for the quaint British expression.

That folk etymology is wrong and you should forget you ever heard it.
Peter Duncanson has shown that the fairground saying existed well before
any vehicle ever had to slow down to negotiate a roundabout, and
Isabelle's examples confirm the primacy of the fairground context.

That explains neither the inferior prosody of the early examples so far found,
nor how and why it escaped into proverbhood.

[James Hogg]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Isabelle C
Searching books.google for occurences of "gain on the
roundabouts" or some of its variations, with "made", "made up",
"gained" and so on before 1912, the date of publication of
Chalmers's poem, has proved quite infuriating as Google mostly
provides snippets, which for the main part seem to come from
rather technical publications, and which are difficult to
decipher.

But search "lose on the roundabouts," because you go slower when
driving around a traffic circle than when driving on a straightaway.
That's probably how an American would say it because that's the
explanation we were given for the quaint British expression.

That folk etymology is wrong and you should forget you ever heard it.
Peter Duncanson has shown that the fairground saying existed well before
any vehicle ever had to slow down to negotiate a roundabout, and
Isabelle's examples confirm the primacy of the fairground context.

That explains neither the inferior prosody of the early examples so far found,
nor how and why it escaped into proverbhood.

Is that good enough reason for you to cling to the folk etymology you
once heard?

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Isabelle C
Searching books.google for occurences of "gain on the
roundabouts" or some of its variations, with "made", "made up",
"gained" and so on before 1912, the date of publication of
Chalmers's poem, has proved quite infuriating as Google mostly
provides snippets, which for the main part seem to come from
rather technical publications, and which are difficult to
decipher.

But search "lose on the roundabouts," because you go slower when
driving around a traffic circle than when driving on a straightaway.
That's probably how an American would say it because that's the
explanation we were given for the quaint British expression.

That folk etymology is wrong and you should forget you ever heard it.
Peter Duncanson has shown that the fairground saying existed well before
any vehicle ever had to slow down to negotiate a roundabout, and
Isabelle's examples confirm the primacy of the fairground context.

That explains neither the inferior prosody of the early examples so far found,
nor how and why it escaped into proverbhood.

Is that good enough reason for you to cling to the folk etymology you
once heard?

Well, do you have a credible explanation for those two things?

[James Hogg]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Isabelle C
Searching books.google for occurences of "gain on the
roundabouts" or some of its variations, with "made", "made up",
"gained" and so on before 1912, the date of publication of
Chalmers's poem, has proved quite infuriating as Google mostly
provides snippets, which for the main part seem to come from
rather technical publications, and which are difficult to
decipher.

But search "lose on the roundabouts," because you go slower when
driving around a traffic circle than when driving on a straightaway.
That's probably how an American would say it because that's the
explanation we were given for the quaint British expression.

That folk etymology is wrong and you should forget you ever heard it.
Peter Duncanson has shown that the fairground saying existed well before
any vehicle ever had to slow down to negotiate a roundabout, and
Isabelle's examples confirm the primacy of the fairground context.

That explains neither the inferior prosody of the early examples so far found,
nor how and why it escaped into proverbhood.

Is that good enough reason for you to cling to the folk etymology you
once heard?

Well, do you have a credible explanation for those two things?

No explanation is necessary in the absence of any credible alternative
etymology.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Isabelle C
Searching books.google for occurences of "gain on the
roundabouts" or some of its variations, with "made", "made up",
"gained" and so on before 1912, the date of publication of
Chalmers's poem, has proved quite infuriating as Google mostly
provides snippets, which for the main part seem to come from
rather technical publications, and which are difficult to
decipher.

But search "lose on the roundabouts," because you go slower when
driving around a traffic circle than when driving on a straightaway.
That's probably how an American would say it because that's the
explanation we were given for the quaint British expression.

That folk etymology is wrong and you should forget you ever heard it.
Peter Duncanson has shown that the fairground saying existed well before
any vehicle ever had to slow down to negotiate a roundabout, and
Isabelle's examples confirm the primacy of the fairground context.

That explains neither the inferior prosody of the early examples so far found,
nor how and why it escaped into proverbhood.

Is that good enough reason for you to cling to the folk etymology you
once heard?

Well, do you have a credible explanation for those two things?

No explanation is necessary in the absence of any credible alternative
etymology.

On the contrary, hat makes the necessity of an explanation _even greater_.

[James Hogg]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Isabelle C
Searching books.google for occurences of "gain on the
roundabouts" or some of its variations, with "made", "made up",
"gained" and so on before 1912, the date of publication of
Chalmers's poem, has proved quite infuriating as Google mostly
provides snippets, which for the main part seem to come from
rather technical publications, and which are difficult to
decipher.

But search "lose on the roundabouts," because you go slower when
driving around a traffic circle than when driving on a straightaway.
That's probably how an American would say it because that's the
explanation we were given for the quaint British expression.

That folk etymology is wrong and you should forget you ever heard it.
Peter Duncanson has shown that the fairground saying existed well before
any vehicle ever had to slow down to negotiate a roundabout, and
Isabelle's examples confirm the primacy of the fairground context.

That explains neither the inferior prosody of the early examples so far found,
nor how and why it escaped into proverbhood.

Is that good enough reason for you to cling to the folk etymology you
once heard?

Well, do you have a credible explanation for those two things?

No explanation is necessary in the absence of any credible alternative
etymology.

On the contrary, hat makes the necessity of an explanation _even greater_.

But hat necessity is felt only by you.

[Tony Cooper]

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Isabelle C
Searching books.google for occurences of "gain on the
roundabouts" or some of its variations, with "made", "made up",
"gained" and so on before 1912, the date of publication of
Chalmers's poem, has proved quite infuriating as Google mostly
provides snippets, which for the main part seem to come from
rather technical publications, and which are difficult to
decipher.

But search "lose on the roundabouts," because you go slower when
driving around a traffic circle than when driving on a straightaway.
That's probably how an American would say it because that's the
explanation we were given for the quaint British expression.

That folk etymology is wrong and you should forget you ever heard it.
Peter Duncanson has shown that the fairground saying existed well before
any vehicle ever had to slow down to negotiate a roundabout, and
Isabelle's examples confirm the primacy of the fairground context.

That explains neither the inferior prosody of the early examples so far found,
nor how and why it escaped into proverbhood.

Is that good enough reason for you to cling to the folk etymology you
once heard?

Well, do you have a credible explanation for those two things?

No explanation is necessary in the absence of any credible alternative
etymology.

On the contrary, hat makes the necessity of an explanation _even greater_.

But hat necessity is felt only by you.

Anyone here can cap that pun.

[s***@gmail.com]

Post by Tony Cooper

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Isabelle C
Searching books.google for occurences of "gain on the
roundabouts" or some of its variations, with "made", "made up",
"gained" and so on before 1912, the date of publication of
Chalmers's poem, has proved quite infuriating as Google mostly
provides snippets, which for the main part seem to come from
rather technical publications, and which are difficult to
decipher.

But search "lose on the roundabouts," because you go slower when
driving around a traffic circle than when driving on a straightaway.
That's probably how an American would say it because that's the
explanation we were given for the quaint British expression.

That folk etymology is wrong and you should forget you ever heard it.
Peter Duncanson has shown that the fairground saying existed well before
any vehicle ever had to slow down to negotiate a roundabout, and
Isabelle's examples confirm the primacy of the fairground context.

That explains neither the inferior prosody of the early examples so far found,
nor how and why it escaped into proverbhood.

Is that good enough reason for you to cling to the folk etymology you
once heard?

Well, do you have a credible explanation for those two things?

No explanation is necessary in the absence of any credible alternative
etymology.

On the contrary, hat makes the necessity of an explanation _even greater_.

But hat necessity is felt only by you.

Anyone here can cap that pun.

You don't have to top *everything*.

/dps

[Tony Cooper]

Post by s***@gmail.com

Post by Tony Cooper

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Isabelle C
Searching books.google for occurences of "gain on the
roundabouts" or some of its variations, with "made", "made up",
"gained" and so on before 1912, the date of publication of
Chalmers's poem, has proved quite infuriating as Google mostly
provides snippets, which for the main part seem to come from
rather technical publications, and which are difficult to
decipher.

But search "lose on the roundabouts," because you go slower when
driving around a traffic circle than when driving on a straightaway.
That's probably how an American would say it because that's the
explanation we were given for the quaint British expression.

That folk etymology is wrong and you should forget you ever heard it.
Peter Duncanson has shown that the fairground saying existed well before
any vehicle ever had to slow down to negotiate a roundabout, and
Isabelle's examples confirm the primacy of the fairground context.

That explains neither the inferior prosody of the early examples so far found,
nor how and why it escaped into proverbhood.

Is that good enough reason for you to cling to the folk etymology you
once heard?

Well, do you have a credible explanation for those two things?

No explanation is necessary in the absence of any credible alternative
etymology.

On the contrary, hat makes the necessity of an explanation _even greater_.

But hat necessity is felt only by you.

Anyone here can cap that pun.

You don't have to top *everything*.

Are you trying to put a lid on the hat puns?

[Katy Jennison]

Post by Tony Cooper

Post by s***@gmail.com

Post by Tony Cooper

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Isabelle C
Searching books.google for occurences of "gain on the
roundabouts" or some of its variations, with "made", "made up",
"gained" and so on before 1912, the date of publication of
Chalmers's poem, has proved quite infuriating as Google mostly
provides snippets, which for the main part seem to come from
rather technical publications, and which are difficult to
decipher.

But search "lose on the roundabouts," because you go slower when
driving around a traffic circle than when driving on a straightaway.
That's probably how an American would say it because that's the
explanation we were given for the quaint British expression.

That folk etymology is wrong and you should forget you ever heard it.
Peter Duncanson has shown that the fairground saying existed well before
any vehicle ever had to slow down to negotiate a roundabout, and
Isabelle's examples confirm the primacy of the fairground context.

That explains neither the inferior prosody of the early examples so far found,
nor how and why it escaped into proverbhood.

Is that good enough reason for you to cling to the folk etymology you
once heard?

Well, do you have a credible explanation for those two things?

No explanation is necessary in the absence of any credible alternative
etymology.

On the contrary, hat makes the necessity of an explanation _even greater_.

But hat necessity is felt only by you.

Anyone here can cap that pun.

You don't have to top *everything*.

Are you trying to put a lid on the hat puns?

Looks like titfer tat.

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

On Mon, 28 Dec 2015 22:04:35 +0000, Katy Jennison

Post by Katy Jennison

Post by Tony Cooper

Post by s***@gmail.com

Post by Tony Cooper

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Isabelle C
Searching books.google for occurences of "gain on the
roundabouts" or some of its variations, with "made", "made up",
"gained" and so on before 1912, the date of publication of
Chalmers's poem, has proved quite infuriating as Google mostly
provides snippets, which for the main part seem to come from
rather technical publications, and which are difficult to
decipher.

But search "lose on the roundabouts," because you go slower when
driving around a traffic circle than when driving on a straightaway.
That's probably how an American would say it because that's the
explanation we were given for the quaint British expression.

That folk etymology is wrong and you should forget you ever heard it.
Peter Duncanson has shown that the fairground saying existed well before
any vehicle ever had to slow down to negotiate a roundabout, and
Isabelle's examples confirm the primacy of the fairground context.

That explains neither the inferior prosody of the early examples so far found,
nor how and why it escaped into proverbhood.

Is that good enough reason for you to cling to the folk etymology you
once heard?

Well, do you have a credible explanation for those two things?

No explanation is necessary in the absence of any credible alternative
etymology.

On the contrary, hat makes the necessity of an explanation _even greater_.

But hat necessity is felt only by you.

Anyone here can cap that pun.

You don't have to top *everything*.

Are you trying to put a lid on the hat puns?

Looks like titfer tat.

I'm catching up with this thread, hours late, and had that phrase in
mind but fortunately read ahead to see whether anyone had already used
it.

You got there first. I tip my metaphorical titfer to you, Ma'am.

[Isabelle C]

Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
On Mon, 28 Dec 2015 22:04:35 +0000, Katy Jennison

[...]

Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]

Post by Katy Jennison

Post by Tony Cooper

Post by s***@gmail.com

Post by Tony Cooper

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg
No explanation is necessary in the absence of any credible alternative
etymology.

On the contrary, hat makes the necessity of an explanation _even greater_.

But hat necessity is felt only by you.

Anyone here can cap that pun.

You don't have to top *everything*.

Are you trying to put a lid on the hat puns?

Looks like titfer tat.

I'm catching up with this thread, hours late, and had that phrase in
mind but fortunately read ahead to see whether anyone had already used
it.
You got there first. I tip my metaphorical titfer to you, Ma'am.

I'm sure that will bowler over.

[LFS]

Post by Isabelle C

Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
On Mon, 28 Dec 2015 22:04:35 +0000, Katy Jennison

[...]

Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]

Post by Katy Jennison

Post by Tony Cooper

Post by s***@gmail.com

Post by Tony Cooper

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg
No explanation is necessary in the absence of any credible alternative
etymology.

On the contrary, hat makes the necessity of an explanation _even greater_.

But hat necessity is felt only by you.

Anyone here can cap that pun.

You don't have to top *everything*.

Are you trying to put a lid on the hat puns?

Looks like titfer tat.

I'm catching up with this thread, hours late, and had that phrase in
mind but fortunately read ahead to see whether anyone had already used
it.
You got there first. I tip my metaphorical titfer to you, Ma'am.

I'm sure that will bowler over.

Or fascinate 'er.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Isabelle C
Searching books.google for occurences of "gain on the
roundabouts" or some of its variations, with "made", "made up",
"gained" and so on before 1912, the date of publication of
Chalmers's poem, has proved quite infuriating as Google mostly
provides snippets, which for the main part seem to come from
rather technical publications, and which are difficult to
decipher.

But search "lose on the roundabouts," because you go slower when
driving around a traffic circle than when driving on a straightaway.
That's probably how an American would say it because that's the
explanation we were given for the quaint British expression.

That folk etymology is wrong and you should forget you ever heard it.
Peter Duncanson has shown that the fairground saying existed well before
any vehicle ever had to slow down to negotiate a roundabout, and
Isabelle's examples confirm the primacy of the fairground context.

That explains neither the inferior prosody of the early examples so far found,
nor how and why it escaped into proverbhood.

Is that good enough reason for you to cling to the folk etymology you
once heard?

Well, do you have a credible explanation for those two things?

No explanation is necessary in the absence of any credible alternative
etymology.

On the contrary, hat makes the necessity of an explanation _even greater_.

But hat necessity is felt only by you.

It would be felt by any lexicographer. Does Partridge deal with it anywjere?

[James Hogg]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels
On the contrary, hat makes the necessity of an explanation _even greater_.

But hat necessity is felt only by you.

It would be felt by any lexicographer. Does Partridge deal with it anywjere?

I can't find it anywjere in Partridge but the OED has it under "swing"
II. 11:

a. A contrivance used for recreation, consisting of a seat which is
suspended from above on ropes or rods and on which a person may sit and
swing to and fro.

b. Colloq. phr. to gain on the swings and lose on the roundabouts and
varr., according to which one's losses in one quarter balance one's
gains in another.

No mention of swings in roads, for blindingly obvious reasons.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels
On the contrary, hat makes the necessity of an explanation _even greater_.

But hat necessity is felt only by you.

It would be felt by any lexicographer. Does Partridge deal with it
anywhere?

I can't find it anywjere in Partridge but the OED has it under "swing"
a. A contrivance used for recreation, consisting of a seat which is
suspended from above on ropes or rods and on which a person may sit and
swing to and fro.
b. Colloq. phr. to gain on the swings and lose on the roundabouts and
varr., according to which one's losses in one quarter balance one's
gains in another.
No mention of swings in roads, for blindingly obvious reasons.

And no hint (as none would be expected,since OED is not a dictionary of catch
phrases and cliches) of how the expression made its way from supposed carnie
(or gypsy?) usage into general use. Such hints and speculations would be
expected from Partridge (who was not, and never claimed to be, trained in lexicography).

[Jack Campin]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Peter Duncanson [BrE]
b. Colloq. phr. to gain on the swings and lose on the roundabouts
and varr., according to which one's losses in one quarter balance
one's gains in another.

And no hint (as none would be expected,since OED is not a dictionary
of catch phrases and cliches) of how the expression made its way from
supposed carnie (or gypsy?) usage into general use.

Surely the phrase would have started among the patrons of carnival
rides rather than the operators?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
e m a i l : j a c k @ c a m p i n . m e . u k
Jack Campin, 11 Third Street, Newtongrange, Midlothian EH22 4PU, Scotland
mobile [phone] <http://www.campin.me.uk> Twitter: JackCampin

[James Hogg]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

On Monday, December 28, 2015 at 8:06:26 AM UTC-5, James Hogg

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels
On the contrary, hat makes the necessity of an explanation
_even greater_.

But hat necessity is felt only by you.

It would be felt by any lexicographer. Does Partridge deal with
it anywhere?

I can't find it anywjere in Partridge but the OED has it under
a. A contrivance used for recreation, consisting of a seat which is
suspended from above on ropes or rods and on which a person may
sit and swing to and fro.
b. Colloq. phr. to gain on the swings and lose on the roundabouts
and varr., according to which one's losses in one quarter balance
one's gains in another.
No mention of swings in roads, for blindingly obvious reasons.

And no hint (as none would be expected,since OED is not a dictionary
of catch phrases and cliches) of how the expression made its way from
supposed carnie (or gypsy?) usage into general use. Such hints and
speculations would be expected from Partridge (who was not, and never
claimed to be, trained in lexicography).

Instead of this childish niggling, could you instead suggest a plausible
alternative origin for these phrases about gains and losses on
roundabouts, swings and coconut shies that started to appear in print
around 1907?

[David Kleinecke]

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels
On the contrary, hat makes the necessity of an explanation _even greater_.

But hat necessity is felt only by you.

It would be felt by any lexicographer. Does Partridge deal with
it anywhere?

I can't find it anywjere in Partridge but the OED has it under
a. A contrivance used for recreation, consisting of a seat which is
suspended from above on ropes or rods and on which a person may
sit and swing to and fro.
b. Colloq. phr. to gain on the swings and lose on the roundabouts
and varr., according to which one's losses in one quarter balance
one's gains in another.
No mention of swings in roads, for blindingly obvious reasons.

And no hint (as none would be expected,since OED is not a dictionary
of catch phrases and cliches) of how the expression made its way from
supposed carnie (or gypsy?) usage into general use. Such hints and
speculations would be expected from Partridge (who was not, and never
claimed to be, trained in lexicography).

Instead of this childish niggling, could you instead suggest a plausible
alternative origin for these phrases about gains and losses on
roundabouts, swings and coconut shies that started to appear in print
around 1907?

Cause and effect. Rather than the poem inducing the usage the usage might
have induced the poem.

[James Hogg]

Post by David Kleinecke

Post by James Hogg

On Monday, December 28, 2015 at 9:52:59 AM UTC-5, James Hogg

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels
On the contrary, hat makes the necessity of an
explanation _even greater_.

But hat necessity is felt only by you.

It would be felt by any lexicographer. Does Partridge deal
with it anywhere?

I can't find it anywjere in Partridge but the OED has it under
a. A contrivance used for recreation, consisting of a seat
which is suspended from above on ropes or rods and on which a
person may sit and swing to and fro.
b. Colloq. phr. to gain on the swings and lose on the
roundabouts and varr., according to which one's losses in one
quarter balance one's gains in another.
No mention of swings in roads, for blindingly obvious reasons.

And no hint (as none would be expected,since OED is not a
dictionary of catch phrases and cliches) of how the expression
made its way from supposed carnie (or gypsy?) usage into general
use. Such hints and speculations would be expected from Partridge
(who was not, and never claimed to be, trained in lexicography).

Instead of this childish niggling, could you instead suggest a
plausible alternative origin for these phrases about gains and
losses on roundabouts, swings and coconut shies that started to
appear in print around 1907?

Cause and effect. Rather than the poem inducing the usage the usage
might have induced the poem.

Evidently. The poem was published in 1912 and seems to be incorporating
a well-known trendy phrase as a punch line. P. G. Wodehouse, in "Psmith
in the City", 1910, likewise uses it as an established proverbial phrase:

'How curious, Comrade Gregory,' mused Psmith, as they went, 'are the
workings of Fate! A moment back, and your life was a blank. Comrade
Jackson, that prince of Fixed Depositors, had gone. How, you said to
yourself despairingly, can his place be filled? Then the cloud broke,
and the sun shone out again. _I_ came to help you. What you lose on the
swings, you make up on the roundabouts. Now show me what I have to do,
and then let us make this department sizzle. You have drawn a good
ticket, Comrade Gregory.'

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels
On the contrary, hat makes the necessity of an explanation _even greater_.

But hat necessity is felt only by you.

It would be felt by any lexicographer. Does Partridge deal with
it anywhere?

I can't find it anywjere in Partridge but the OED has it under
a. A contrivance used for recreation, consisting of a seat which is
suspended from above on ropes or rods and on which a person may
sit and swing to and fro.
b. Colloq. phr. to gain on the swings and lose on the roundabouts
and varr., according to which one's losses in one quarter balance
one's gains in another.
No mention of swings in roads, for blindingly obvious reasons.

And no hint (as none would be expected,since OED is not a dictionary
of catch phrases and cliches) of how the expression made its way from
supposed carnie (or gypsy?) usage into general use. Such hints and
speculations would be expected from Partridge (who was not, and never
claimed to be, trained in lexicography).

Instead of this childish niggling, could you instead suggest a plausible
alternative origin for these phrases about gains and losses on
roundabouts, swings and coconut shies that started to appear in print
around 1907?

Oh, you don't like the carnival-equipment explanation either? Despite the
fairly large array of evidence provided for it? (Was it "lectio difficilior"
that perplexed you?)

What no one has even suggested an answer to, other than that peculiar poem,
is how the expression _came into common use among the general public_,
which is not generally concerned with or exposed to the economics of carnivals.

[James Hogg]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels
On the contrary, hat makes the necessity of an explanation _even greater_.

But hat necessity is felt only by you.

It would be felt by any lexicographer. Does Partridge deal with
it anywhere?

I can't find it anywjere in Partridge but the OED has it under
a. A contrivance used for recreation, consisting of a seat which is
suspended from above on ropes or rods and on which a person may
sit and swing to and fro.
b. Colloq. phr. to gain on the swings and lose on the roundabouts
and varr., according to which one's losses in one quarter balance
one's gains in another.
No mention of swings in roads, for blindingly obvious reasons.

And no hint (as none would be expected,since OED is not a dictionary
of catch phrases and cliches) of how the expression made its way from
supposed carnie (or gypsy?) usage into general use. Such hints and
speculations would be expected from Partridge (who was not, and never
claimed to be, trained in lexicography).

Instead of this childish niggling, could you instead suggest a plausible
alternative origin for these phrases about gains and losses on
roundabouts, swings and coconut shies that started to appear in print
around 1907?

Oh, you don't like the carnival-equipment explanation either? Despite the
fairly large array of evidence provided for it? (Was it "lectio difficilior"
that perplexed you?)
What no one has even suggested an answer to, other than that peculiar poem,
is how the expression _came into common use among the general public_,
which is not generally concerned with or exposed to the economics of carnivals.

Perhaps, as with so many etymologies, no one knows HOW it escaped. What
is obvious to everyone is that it DID happen.

[James Hogg]

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

On Monday, December 28, 2015 at 8:06:26 AM UTC-5, James

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels
On the contrary, hat makes the necessity of an
explanation _even greater_.

But hat necessity is felt only by you.

It would be felt by any lexicographer. Does Partridge deal
with it anywhere?

I can't find it anywjere in Partridge but the OED has it
a. A contrivance used for recreation, consisting of a seat
which is suspended from above on ropes or rods and on which a
person may sit and swing to and fro.
b. Colloq. phr. to gain on the swings and lose on the
roundabouts and varr., according to which one's losses in one
quarter balance one's gains in another.
No mention of swings in roads, for blindingly obvious
reasons.

And no hint (as none would be expected,since OED is not a
dictionary of catch phrases and cliches) of how the expression
made its way from supposed carnie (or gypsy?) usage into
general use. Such hints and speculations would be expected from
Partridge (who was not, and never claimed to be, trained in
lexicography).

Instead of this childish niggling, could you instead suggest a
plausible alternative origin for these phrases about gains and
losses on roundabouts, swings and coconut shies that started to
appear in print around 1907?

Oh, you don't like the carnival-equipment explanation either?
Despite the fairly large array of evidence provided for it? (Was it
"lectio difficilior" that perplexed you?)
What no one has even suggested an answer to, other than that
peculiar poem, is how the expression _came into common use among
the general public_, which is not generally concerned with or
exposed to the economics of carnivals.

Perhaps, as with so many etymologies, no one knows HOW it escaped.
What is obvious to everyone is that it DID happen.

An older proverb with the same meaning is "What we lose in hake we shall
have in herring", first recorded in Carew's "Survey of Cornwall", 1602.

"The Hakes ... haunted the coast in great abundance; but now, being
depriued of their wonted baite, are much diminished; verifying the
prouerb, What we lose in Hake, we shall haue in Herring."

I have no idea how that expression came into proverbial use among people
not generally concerned with or exposed to the economics of fishing, but
it obviously did. Maybe people in the past were more empathetic and
capable of imagining things outside their own narrow world.

Burton Stevenson refers to Carew in his "Home Book of Proverbs, Maxims,
and Familiar Phrases". He describes it as a variant of the Latin proverb
"Quod alibi diminutum, exaequatur alibi."

Another variant from John Clarke, Paroemiologia (1639):
"What I lost in the salt fish I gained in the red herrings."

And Theodore Roosevelt quoted the remark of an Italian fruit-vendor in
New York City, c. 1890:
"What I make on d' peanut I lose on d' damn banan'."

Then Stevenson quotes Chalmers' poem (which he dates 1910, not 1912 as
in OED) and later literary examples of swings and roundabouts e.g. from
Somerset Maugham and GBS.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels
On the contrary, hat makes the necessity of an explanation _even greater_.

But hat necessity is felt only by you.

It would be felt by any lexicographer. Does Partridge deal with
it anywhere?

I can't find it anywjere in Partridge but the OED has it under
a. A contrivance used for recreation, consisting of a seat which is
suspended from above on ropes or rods and on which a person may
sit and swing to and fro.
b. Colloq. phr. to gain on the swings and lose on the roundabouts
and varr., according to which one's losses in one quarter balance
one's gains in another.
No mention of swings in roads, for blindingly obvious reasons.

And no hint (as none would be expected,since OED is not a dictionary
of catch phrases and cliches) of how the expression made its way from
supposed carnie (or gypsy?) usage into general use. Such hints and
speculations would be expected from Partridge (who was not, and never
claimed to be, trained in lexicography).

Instead of this childish niggling, could you instead suggest a plausible
alternative origin for these phrases about gains and losses on
roundabouts, swings and coconut shies that started to appear in print
around 1907?

Oh, you don't like the carnival-equipment explanation either? Despite the
fairly large array of evidence provided for it? (Was it "lectio difficilior"
that perplexed you?)
What no one has even suggested an answer to, other than that peculiar poem,
is how the expression _came into common use among the general public_,
which is not generally concerned with or exposed to the economics of carnivals.

Perhaps, as with so many etymologies, no one knows HOW it escaped. What
is obvious to everyone is that it DID happen.

One way science proceeds is by using research to move things from the "don't
know how" column to the "know how" column.

[David Kleinecke]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels
On the contrary, hat makes the necessity of an explanation
_even greater_.

But hat necessity is felt only by you.

It would be felt by any lexicographer. Does Partridge deal with
it anywhere?

I can't find it anywjere in Partridge but the OED has it under
a. A contrivance used for recreation, consisting of a seat which is
suspended from above on ropes or rods and on which a person may
sit and swing to and fro.
b. Colloq. phr. to gain on the swings and lose on the roundabouts
and varr., according to which one's losses in one quarter balance
one's gains in another.
No mention of swings in roads, for blindingly obvious reasons.

And no hint (as none would be expected,since OED is not a dictionary
of catch phrases and cliches) of how the expression made its way from
supposed carnie (or gypsy?) usage into general use. Such hints and
speculations would be expected from Partridge (who was not, and never
claimed to be, trained in lexicography).

Instead of this childish niggling, could you instead suggest a plausible
alternative origin for these phrases about gains and losses on
roundabouts, swings and coconut shies that started to appear in print
around 1907?

Oh, you don't like the carnival-equipment explanation either? Despite the
fairly large array of evidence provided for it? (Was it "lectio difficilior"
that perplexed you?)
What no one has even suggested an answer to, other than that peculiar poem,
is how the expression _came into common use among the general public_,
which is not generally concerned with or exposed to the economics of carnivals.

Perhaps, as with so many etymologies, no one knows HOW it escaped. What
is obvious to everyone is that it DID happen.

One way science proceeds is by using research to move things from the "don't
know how" column to the "know how" column.

It looks to me like a timeless proverb pattern:
What we lose in A we make in B
(with variability in all its parts) that gets filled in with the lore
of some place where variability is expected.

What we don't do in C++ we do in Java
What we don't get in robberies we get in murders
What the Republicans don't do the Democrat's do
Who don't go to Disneyland go to Sea World

I think the jump to roundabouts and swings was made because it sounded
cute.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by David Kleinecke

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels
On the contrary, hat makes the necessity of an explanation
_even greater_.

But hat necessity is felt only by you.

It would be felt by any lexicographer. Does Partridge deal with
it anywhere?

I can't find it anywjere in Partridge but the OED has it under
a. A contrivance used for recreation, consisting of a seat which is
suspended from above on ropes or rods and on which a person may
sit and swing to and fro.
b. Colloq. phr. to gain on the swings and lose on the roundabouts
and varr., according to which one's losses in one quarter balance
one's gains in another.
No mention of swings in roads, for blindingly obvious reasons.

And no hint (as none would be expected,since OED is not a dictionary
of catch phrases and cliches) of how the expression made its way from
supposed carnie (or gypsy?) usage into general use. Such hints and
speculations would be expected from Partridge (who was not, and never
claimed to be, trained in lexicography).

Instead of this childish niggling, could you instead suggest a plausible
alternative origin for these phrases about gains and losses on
roundabouts, swings and coconut shies that started to appear in print
around 1907?

Oh, you don't like the carnival-equipment explanation either? Despite the
fairly large array of evidence provided for it? (Was it "lectio difficilior"
that perplexed you?)
What no one has even suggested an answer to, other than that peculiar poem,
is how the expression _came into common use among the general public_,
which is not generally concerned with or exposed to the economics of carnivals.

Perhaps, as with so many etymologies, no one knows HOW it escaped. What
is obvious to everyone is that it DID happen.

One way science proceeds is by using research to move things from the "don't
know how" column to the "know how" column.

What we lose in A we make in B
(with variability in all its parts) that gets filled in with the lore
of some place where variability is expected.
What we don't do in C++ we do in Java
What we don't get in robberies we get in murders
What the Republicans don't do the Democrat's do
Who don't go to Disneyland go to Sea World
I think the jump to roundabouts and swings was made because it sounded
cute.

Perhaps, but who? It has to be someone inside the carnival industry who was
in a position to be imitated by people who weren't.

[Tony Cooper]

On Tue, 29 Dec 2015 11:46:14 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by David Kleinecke

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels
On the contrary, hat makes the necessity of an explanation
_even greater_.

But hat necessity is felt only by you.

It would be felt by any lexicographer. Does Partridge deal with
it anywhere?

I can't find it anywjere in Partridge but the OED has it under
a. A contrivance used for recreation, consisting of a seat which is
suspended from above on ropes or rods and on which a person may
sit and swing to and fro.
b. Colloq. phr. to gain on the swings and lose on the roundabouts
and varr., according to which one's losses in one quarter balance
one's gains in another.
No mention of swings in roads, for blindingly obvious reasons.

And no hint (as none would be expected,since OED is not a dictionary
of catch phrases and cliches) of how the expression made its way from
supposed carnie (or gypsy?) usage into general use. Such hints and
speculations would be expected from Partridge (who was not, and never
claimed to be, trained in lexicography).

Instead of this childish niggling, could you instead suggest a plausible
alternative origin for these phrases about gains and losses on
roundabouts, swings and coconut shies that started to appear in print
around 1907?

Oh, you don't like the carnival-equipment explanation either? Despite the
fairly large array of evidence provided for it? (Was it "lectio difficilior"
that perplexed you?)
What no one has even suggested an answer to, other than that peculiar poem,
is how the expression _came into common use among the general public_,
which is not generally concerned with or exposed to the economics of carnivals.

Perhaps, as with so many etymologies, no one knows HOW it escaped. What
is obvious to everyone is that it DID happen.

One way science proceeds is by using research to move things from the "don't
know how" column to the "know how" column.

What we lose in A we make in B
(with variability in all its parts) that gets filled in with the lore
of some place where variability is expected.
What we don't do in C++ we do in Java
What we don't get in robberies we get in murders
What the Republicans don't do the Democrat's do
Who don't go to Disneyland go to Sea World
I think the jump to roundabouts and swings was made because it sounded
cute.

Perhaps, but who? It has to be someone inside the carnival industry who was
in a position to be imitated by people who weren't.

The "carnival industry", as you call it, has long been a form of
temporary employment. Quite often, when a fair comes to town, locals
are hired to work in booths. Fairs are not in place 12/52/7. There
may be weeks between fairs, and even longer in the winter. The fair
operators can't retain all of the required people on the payroll when
there aren't fairs in progress.

Actually, what is being discussed here is the "midway" feature of a
fair. There is no particular skill required to man the coconut
shy/milk bottle booth, so the fair would not carry someone on the
payroll during off times. The specialized people - performers and
such - would travel with the fair operators.

Those temporary employees are part of the community before and after
the fair leaves town. Anything they heard during their temporary
stint of employment would be repeated at ordinary phrases applied to
similar situations.

When I was about 14 I worked at a week-long midway in the basketball
booth. All I did was collect money and hand the few winners a prize.
The hoop in these booths, by the way, is much smaller in diameter than
a standard hoop. I got 50 cents an hour to work, daily pay, but the
operator stiffed me on the last day. He told me to come back the next
day for my money, but they packed up during the night and departed.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Tony Cooper
On Tue, 29 Dec 2015 11:46:14 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by David Kleinecke

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

On Monday, December 28, 2015 at 8:06:26 AM UTC-5, James Hogg

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels
On the contrary, hat makes the necessity of an explanation
_even greater_.

But hat necessity is felt only by you.

It would be felt by any lexicographer. Does Partridge deal with
it anywhere?

I can't find it anywjere in Partridge but the OED has it under
a. A contrivance used for recreation, consisting of a seat which is
suspended from above on ropes or rods and on which a person may
sit and swing to and fro.
b. Colloq. phr. to gain on the swings and lose on the roundabouts
and varr., according to which one's losses in one quarter balance
one's gains in another.
No mention of swings in roads, for blindingly obvious reasons.

And no hint (as none would be expected,since OED is not a dictionary
of catch phrases and cliches) of how the expression made its way from
supposed carnie (or gypsy?) usage into general use. Such hints and
speculations would be expected from Partridge (who was not, and never
claimed to be, trained in lexicography).

Instead of this childish niggling, could you instead suggest a plausible
alternative origin for these phrases about gains and losses on
roundabouts, swings and coconut shies that started to appear in print
around 1907?

Oh, you don't like the carnival-equipment explanation either? Despite the
fairly large array of evidence provided for it? (Was it "lectio difficilior"
that perplexed you?)
What no one has even suggested an answer to, other than that peculiar poem,
is how the expression _came into common use among the general public_,
which is not generally concerned with or exposed to the economics of carnivals.

Perhaps, as with so many etymologies, no one knows HOW it escaped. What
is obvious to everyone is that it DID happen.

One way science proceeds is by using research to move things from the "don't
know how" column to the "know how" column.

What we lose in A we make in B
(with variability in all its parts) that gets filled in with the lore
of some place where variability is expected.
What we don't do in C++ we do in Java
What we don't get in robberies we get in murders
What the Republicans don't do the Democrat's do
Who don't go to Disneyland go to Sea World
I think the jump to roundabouts and swings was made because it sounded
cute.

Perhaps, but who? It has to be someone inside the carnival industry who was
in a position to be imitated by people who weren't.

The "carnival industry", as you call it, has long been a form of
temporary employment. Quite often, when a fair comes to town, locals
are hired to work in booths. Fairs are not in place 12/52/7. There
may be weeks between fairs, and even longer in the winter. The fair
operators can't retain all of the required people on the payroll when
there aren't fairs in progress.
Actually, what is being discussed here is the "midway" feature of a
fair. There is no particular skill required to man the coconut
shy/milk bottle booth, so the fair would not carry someone on the
payroll during off times. The specialized people - performers and
such - would travel with the fair operators.

What does thathave to do with either swings or roundabouts, and why would
Management discuss their finances within earshot of underlings -- temporary
local underlings, no less?

Post by Tony Cooper
Those temporary employees are part of the community before and after
the fair leaves town. Anything they heard during their temporary
stint of employment would be repeated at ordinary phrases applied to
similar situations.
When I was about 14 I worked at a week-long midway in the basketball
booth. All I did was collect money and hand the few winners a prize.
The hoop in these booths, by the way, is much smaller in diameter than
a standard hoop. I got 50 cents an hour to work, daily pay, but the
operator stiffed me on the last day. He told me to come back the next
day for my money, but they packed up during the night and departed.

So what they lost on the hoops, they made up on the Coopers.

[charles]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by David Kleinecke

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels
On the contrary, hat makes the necessity of an explanation
_even greater_.

But hat necessity is felt only by you.

It would be felt by any lexicographer. Does Partridge deal
with it anywhere?

I can't find it anywjere in Partridge but the OED has it under
"swing" II. 11: a. A contrivance used for recreation,
consisting of a seat which is suspended from above on ropes or
rods and on which a person may sit and swing to and fro. b.
Colloq. phr. to gain on the swings and lose on the roundabouts
and varr., according to which one's losses in one quarter
balance one's gains in another. No mention of swings in
roads, for blindingly obvious reasons.

And no hint (as none would be expected,since OED is not a
dictionary of catch phrases and cliches) of how the expression
made its way from supposed carnie (or gypsy?) usage into
general use. Such hints and speculations would be expected from
Partridge (who was not, and never claimed to be, trained in
lexicography).

Instead of this childish niggling, could you instead suggest a
plausible alternative origin for these phrases about gains and
losses on roundabouts, swings and coconut shies that started to
appear in print around 1907?

Oh, you don't like the carnival-equipment explanation either?
Despite the fairly large array of evidence provided for it? (Was
it "lectio difficilior" that perplexed you?) What no one has
even suggested an answer to, other than that peculiar poem, is
how the expression _came into common use among the general
public_, which is not generally concerned with or exposed to the
economics of carnivals.

Perhaps, as with so many etymologies, no one knows HOW it escaped.
What is obvious to everyone is that it DID happen.

One way science proceeds is by using research to move things from the
"don't know how" column to the "know how" column.

What we lose in A we make in B
(with variability in all its parts) that gets filled in with the lore
of some place where variability is expected.
What we don't do in C++ we do in Java
What we don't get in robberies we get in murders
What the Republicans don't do the Democrat's do
Who don't go to Disneyland go to Sea World
I think the jump to roundabouts and swings was made because it sounded
cute.

Perhaps, but who? It has to be someone inside the carnival industry who
was in a position to be imitated by people who weren't.

Carnival is the wrong word. "Fairground" would be more correct. Those who
were involved were often called "showmen".

[RH Draney]

Post by charles
Carnival is the wrong word. "Fairground" would be more correct. Those who
were involved were often called "showmen".

Carnival is the right word thispondia, because those involved are called
"carnies"...if you started in by calling it a "fairground", one of them
might think you were setting up for an insult and bite you with his two
remaining teeth (one pointing east, the other south)....r

[Tony Cooper]

Post by RH Draney

Post by charles
Carnival is the wrong word. "Fairground" would be more correct. Those who
were involved were often called "showmen".

Carnival is the right word thispondia, because those involved are called
"carnies"...if you started in by calling it a "fairground", one of them
might think you were setting up for an insult and bite you with his two
remaining teeth (one pointing east, the other south)....r

I'm with "charles" on this. They have carnival rides on the midway,
but the event is usually a fair. Often, though, there is just a
midway set up in a shopping mall parking lot.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Tony Cooper

Post by RH Draney

Post by charles
Carnival is the wrong word. "Fairground" would be more correct. Those who
were involved were often called "showmen".

Carnival is the right word thispondia, because those involved are called
"carnies"...if you started in by calling it a "fairground", one of them
might think you were setting up for an insult and bite you with his two
remaining teeth (one pointing east, the other south)....r

I'm with "charles" on this. They have carnival rides on the midway,
but the event is usually a fair. Often, though, there is just a
midway set up in a shopping mall parking lot.

But we're not talking about midways or coconut shying; that got in solely
in Tony's own attempt to move the goalposts (or phony basketball hoops).
We're talking about carnival rides that in England are called "swings"
and "roundabouts."

[musika]

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Isabelle C
Searching books.google for occurences of "gain on the
roundabouts" or some of its variations, with "made", "made
up", "gained" and so on before 1912, the date of publication
of Chalmers's poem, has proved quite infuriating as Google
mostly provides snippets, which for the main part seem to come
from rather technical publications, and which are difficult to
decipher.

But search "lose on the roundabouts," because you go slower when
driving around a traffic circle than when driving on a
straightaway. That's probably how an American would say it
because that's the explanation we were given for the quaint
British expression.

That folk etymology is wrong and you should forget you ever heard it.
Peter Duncanson has shown that the fairground saying existed well before
any vehicle ever had to slow down to negotiate a roundabout, and
Isabelle's examples confirm the primacy of the fairground context.

That explains neither the inferior prosody of the early examples
so far found, nor how and why it escaped into proverbhood.

Is that good enough reason for you to cling to the folk etymology
you once heard?

Well, do you have a credible explanation for those two things?

No explanation is necessary in the absence of any credible
alternative etymology.

On the contrary, hat makes the necessity of an explanation _even greater_.

But hat necessity is felt only by you.

Nice.

[Janet]

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Isabelle C
Searching books.google for occurences of "gain on the
roundabouts" or some of its variations, with "made", "made up",
"gained" and so on before 1912, the date of publication of
Chalmers's poem, has proved quite infuriating as Google mostly
provides snippets, which for the main part seem to come from
rather technical publications, and which are difficult to
decipher.

But search "lose on the roundabouts," because you go slower when
driving around a traffic circle than when driving on a straightaway.
That's probably how an American would say it because that's the
explanation we were given for the quaint British expression.

That folk etymology is wrong and you should forget you ever heard it.
Peter Duncanson has shown that the fairground saying existed well before
any vehicle ever had to slow down to negotiate a roundabout,

long before road roundabouts even existed :-)


and

Post by James Hogg
Isabelle's examples confirm the primacy of the fairground context.

Janet

[Katy Jennison]

Post by Peter T. Daniels
But search "lose on the roundabouts," because you go slower when driving
around a traffic circle than when driving on a straightaway. That's probably
how an American would say it because that's the explanation we were given
for the quaint British expression.

Who exactly gave you this explanation?

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Katy Jennison

Post by Peter T. Daniels
But search "lose on the roundabouts," because you go slower when driving
around a traffic circle than when driving on a straightaway. That's probably
how an American would say it because that's the explanation we were given
for the quaint British expression.

Who exactly gave you this explanation?

I've no idea. It must have been decades ago.

[Peter Moylan]

Post by Katy Jennison

Post by Peter T. Daniels
But search "lose on the roundabouts," because you go slower when driving
around a traffic circle than when driving on a straightaway. That's probably
how an American would say it because that's the explanation we were given
for the quaint British expression.

Who exactly gave you this explanation?

And which countries have swings and coconut shies on public roads?

[charles]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Le 27/12/2015 17:39, Katy Jennison a écrit : [about Chalmers's poem
as the origin of the saying "What you lose on the swings you gain on
the roundabouts"]

Post by Katy Jennison
What I'm not entirely convinced of, however, is that the poem is
the origin of the saying, though I see Wikipedia thinks it is.
I've known the saying since my childhood (I was born the year
Chalmers died), but I haven't met the poem until now. But here's
a website about Chalmers and the relevance of the poem to his
http://interestingliterature.com/2015/09/03/the-interesting-origins-of-the-phrase-swings-and-roundabouts/

Searching books.google for occurences of "gain on the roundabouts" or
some of its variations, with "made", "made up", "gained" and so on
before 1912, the date of publication of Chalmers's poem, has proved
quite infuriating as Google mostly provides snippets, which for the
main part seem to come from rather technical publications, and which
are difficult to decipher.

But search "lose on the roundabouts," because you go slower when driving
around a traffic circle than when driving on a straightaway. That's
probably how an American would say it because that's the explanation we
were given for the quaint British expression.

[Snip]

Sounds to me like a tale told to gullible foreigners.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by charles

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Le 27/12/2015 17:39, Katy Jennison a écrit : [about Chalmers's poem
as the origin of the saying "What you lose on the swings you gain on
the roundabouts"]

Post by Katy Jennison
What I'm not entirely convinced of, however, is that the poem is
the origin of the saying, though I see Wikipedia thinks it is.
I've known the saying since my childhood (I was born the year
Chalmers died), but I haven't met the poem until now. But here's
a website about Chalmers and the relevance of the poem to his
http://interestingliterature.com/2015/09/03/the-interesting-origins-of-the-phrase-swings-and-roundabouts/

Searching books.google for occurences of "gain on the roundabouts" or
some of its variations, with "made", "made up", "gained" and so on
before 1912, the date of publication of Chalmers's poem, has proved
quite infuriating as Google mostly provides snippets, which for the
main part seem to come from rather technical publications, and which
are difficult to decipher.

But search "lose on the roundabouts," because you go slower when driving
around a traffic circle than when driving on a straightaway. That's
probably how an American would say it because that's the explanation we
were given for the quaint British expression.

Sounds to me like a tale told to gullible foreigners.

Because it's a lot more credible than the current explanation. Which, however,
prevails because of the philological principle of "lectio difficilior."

[Katy Jennison]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by charles

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Le 27/12/2015 17:39, Katy Jennison a écrit : [about Chalmers's poem
as the origin of the saying "What you lose on the swings you gain on
the roundabouts"]

Post by Katy Jennison
What I'm not entirely convinced of, however, is that the poem is
the origin of the saying, though I see Wikipedia thinks it is.
I've known the saying since my childhood (I was born the year
Chalmers died), but I haven't met the poem until now. But here's
a website about Chalmers and the relevance of the poem to his
http://interestingliterature.com/2015/09/03/the-interesting-origins-of-the-phrase-swings-and-roundabouts/

Searching books.google for occurences of "gain on the roundabouts" or
some of its variations, with "made", "made up", "gained" and so on
before 1912, the date of publication of Chalmers's poem, has proved
quite infuriating as Google mostly provides snippets, which for the
main part seem to come from rather technical publications, and which
are difficult to decipher.

But search "lose on the roundabouts," because you go slower when driving
around a traffic circle than when driving on a straightaway. That's
probably how an American would say it because that's the explanation we
were given for the quaint British expression.

Sounds to me like a tale told to gullible foreigners.

Because it's a lot more credible than the current explanation. Which, however,
prevails because of the philological principle of "lectio difficilior."

How is it more credible? As has been demonstrated, the saying is older
than the existence of roundabouts of the traffic variety, and "swings"
has no road-related meaning (as far as I know) in either BrE or AmE. The
fairground terms may be unfamiliar to you, but they've been common
currency for generations of Brits.

[James Hogg]

Post by Katy Jennison

Post by Peter T. Daniels

In article

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Le 27/12/2015 17:39, Katy Jennison a écrit : [about
Chalmers's poem as the origin of the saying "What you lose
on the swings you gain on the roundabouts"]

Post by Katy Jennison
What I'm not entirely convinced of, however, is that the
poem is the origin of the saying, though I see Wikipedia
thinks it is. I've known the saying since my childhood (I
was born the year Chalmers died), but I haven't met the
poem until now. But here's a website about Chalmers and
the relevance of the poem to his other profession of
http://interestingliterature.com/2015/09/03/the-interesting-origins-of-the-phrase-swings-and-roundabouts/

Searching books.google for occurences of "gain on the
roundabouts" or some of its variations, with "made", "made
up", "gained" and so on before 1912, the date of
publication of Chalmers's poem, has proved quite
infuriating as Google mostly provides snippets, which for
the main part seem to come from rather technical
publications, and which are difficult to decipher.

But search "lose on the roundabouts," because you go slower
when driving around a traffic circle than when driving on a
straightaway. That's probably how an American would say it
because that's the explanation we were given for the quaint
British expression.

Sounds to me like a tale told to gullible foreigners.

Because it's a lot more credible than the current explanation.
Which, however, prevails because of the philological principle of
"lectio difficilior."

How is it more credible? As has been demonstrated, the saying is
older than the existence of roundabouts of the traffic variety, and
"swings" has no road-related meaning (as far as I know) in either BrE
or AmE. The fairground terms may be unfamiliar to you, but they've
been common currency for generations of Brits.

And my example from 1908, with no mention of roundabouts and antedating
the existence of road roundabouts, must be enough to convince anyone of
the fairground origin of a phrase that allowed various combinations:

"What one loses on the cocoanuts one makes up for on the swings."

[David Kleinecke]

Post by James Hogg

Post by Katy Jennison

Post by Peter T. Daniels

In article

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Le 27/12/2015 17:39, Katy Jennison a écrit : [about
Chalmers's poem as the origin of the saying "What you lose
on the swings you gain on the roundabouts"]

Post by Katy Jennison
What I'm not entirely convinced of, however, is that the
poem is the origin of the saying, though I see Wikipedia
thinks it is. I've known the saying since my childhood (I
was born the year Chalmers died), but I haven't met the
poem until now. But here's a website about Chalmers and
the relevance of the poem to his other profession of
http://interestingliterature.com/2015/09/03/the-interesting-origins-of-the-phrase-swings-and-roundabouts/

Searching books.google for occurences of "gain on the
roundabouts" or some of its variations, with "made", "made
up", "gained" and so on before 1912, the date of
publication of Chalmers's poem, has proved quite
infuriating as Google mostly provides snippets, which for
the main part seem to come from rather technical
publications, and which are difficult to decipher.

But search "lose on the roundabouts," because you go slower
when driving around a traffic circle than when driving on a
straightaway. That's probably how an American would say it
because that's the explanation we were given for the quaint
British expression.

Sounds to me like a tale told to gullible foreigners.

Because it's a lot more credible than the current explanation.
Which, however, prevails because of the philological principle of
"lectio difficilior."

How is it more credible? As has been demonstrated, the saying is
older than the existence of roundabouts of the traffic variety, and
"swings" has no road-related meaning (as far as I know) in either BrE
or AmE. The fairground terms may be unfamiliar to you, but they've
been common currency for generations of Brits.

And my example from 1908, with no mention of roundabouts and antedating
the existence of road roundabouts, must be enough to convince anyone of

I favor the carnival origin. But I think we cannot assume 1908 is earlier
than traffic roundabouts. Maybe the Romans didn't use traffic roundabouts
but I am certain traffic circles existed in horse-and-buggy days. I think
photos of them (usually with a flag pole in the middle) would be
discovered were one to look for them.

[Mark Brader]

... I am certain traffic circles existed in horse-and-buggy days.
I think photos of them (usually with a flag pole in the middle)
would be discovered were one to look for them.

The trouble with pictures like these:

Loading Image...

Loading Image...

is that there's so little traffic, you can't really tell if they show
it in a circular pattern or not.

[CDB]

Post by Mark Brader

... I am certain traffic circles existed in horse-and-buggy days. I
think photos of them (usually with a flag pole in the middle) would
be discovered were one to look for them.

http://www.histoire-fr.com/images/place_de_etoile_1867.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9c/Piazza_della_repubblica_in_1895.jpg
is that there's so little traffic, you can't really tell if they
show it in a circular pattern or not.

But you can be pretty sure they didn't have to slow down on the curve.

[Katy Jennison]

Post by David Kleinecke

Post by James Hogg

Post by Katy Jennison

Post by Peter T. Daniels

In article

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Le 27/12/2015 17:39, Katy Jennison a écrit : [about
Chalmers's poem as the origin of the saying "What you lose
on the swings you gain on the roundabouts"]

Post by Katy Jennison
What I'm not entirely convinced of, however, is that the
poem is the origin of the saying, though I see Wikipedia
thinks it is. I've known the saying since my childhood (I
was born the year Chalmers died), but I haven't met the
poem until now. But here's a website about Chalmers and
the relevance of the poem to his other profession of
http://interestingliterature.com/2015/09/03/the-interesting-origins-of-the-phrase-swings-and-roundabouts/

Searching books.google for occurences of "gain on the
roundabouts" or some of its variations, with "made", "made
up", "gained" and so on before 1912, the date of
publication of Chalmers's poem, has proved quite
infuriating as Google mostly provides snippets, which for
the main part seem to come from rather technical
publications, and which are difficult to decipher.

But search "lose on the roundabouts," because you go slower
when driving around a traffic circle than when driving on a
straightaway. That's probably how an American would say it
because that's the explanation we were given for the quaint
British expression.

Sounds to me like a tale told to gullible foreigners.

Because it's a lot more credible than the current explanation.
Which, however, prevails because of the philological principle of
"lectio difficilior."

How is it more credible? As has been demonstrated, the saying is
older than the existence of roundabouts of the traffic variety, and
"swings" has no road-related meaning (as far as I know) in either BrE
or AmE. The fairground terms may be unfamiliar to you, but they've
been common currency for generations of Brits.

And my example from 1908, with no mention of roundabouts and antedating
the existence of road roundabouts, must be enough to convince anyone of

I favor the carnival origin. But I think we cannot assume 1908 is earlier
than traffic roundabouts. Maybe the Romans didn't use traffic roundabouts
but I am certain traffic circles existed in horse-and-buggy days. I think
photos of them (usually with a flag pole in the middle) would be
discovered were one to look for them.

Perhaps. Then what about the "swings"? Or, indeed, the coconut shy?

[David Kleinecke]

Post by Katy Jennison

Post by David Kleinecke

Post by James Hogg

Post by Katy Jennison

Post by Peter T. Daniels

In article

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Le 27/12/2015 17:39, Katy Jennison a écrit : [about
Chalmers's poem as the origin of the saying "What you lose
on the swings you gain on the roundabouts"]

Post by Katy Jennison
What I'm not entirely convinced of, however, is that the
poem is the origin of the saying, though I see Wikipedia
thinks it is. I've known the saying since my childhood (I
was born the year Chalmers died), but I haven't met the
poem until now. But here's a website about Chalmers and
the relevance of the poem to his other profession of
http://interestingliterature.com/2015/09/03/the-interesting-origins-of-the-phrase-swings-and-roundabouts/

Searching books.google for occurences of "gain on the
roundabouts" or some of its variations, with "made", "made
up", "gained" and so on before 1912, the date of
publication of Chalmers's poem, has proved quite
infuriating as Google mostly provides snippets, which for
the main part seem to come from rather technical
publications, and which are difficult to decipher.

But search "lose on the roundabouts," because you go slower
when driving around a traffic circle than when driving on a
straightaway. That's probably how an American would say it
because that's the explanation we were given for the quaint
British expression.

Sounds to me like a tale told to gullible foreigners.

Because it's a lot more credible than the current explanation.
Which, however, prevails because of the philological principle of
"lectio difficilior."

How is it more credible? As has been demonstrated, the saying is
older than the existence of roundabouts of the traffic variety, and
"swings" has no road-related meaning (as far as I know) in either BrE
or AmE. The fairground terms may be unfamiliar to you, but they've
been common currency for generations of Brits.

And my example from 1908, with no mention of roundabouts and antedating
the existence of road roundabouts, must be enough to convince anyone of

I favor the carnival origin. But I think we cannot assume 1908 is earlier
than traffic roundabouts. Maybe the Romans didn't use traffic roundabouts
but I am certain traffic circles existed in horse-and-buggy days. I think
photos of them (usually with a flag pole in the middle) would be
discovered were one to look for them.

Perhaps. Then what about the "swings"? Or, indeed, the coconut shy?

I was only arguing the notion that 1908 is earlier than the year traffic
roundabouts were invented. I don't know what earlier instances of the
traffic kind were called. In my youth we called them "circles" and they
were quite common. Most, in my experience, have now been re-engineered
into ordinary intersections.

Swings were, again in my youth, standard equipment in every playground
and we would have surprised to find either roundabouts, which we had
never heard of, or swings at a carnival. But then we had never heard
"What we lose on the swings we make on the roundabouts",

[Robin Bignall]

On Mon, 28 Dec 2015 09:54:42 -0800 (PST), David Kleinecke

Post by David Kleinecke
Swings were, again in my youth, standard equipment in every playground
and we would have surprised to find either roundabouts, which we had
never heard of, or swings at a carnival. But then we had never heard
"What we lose on the swings we make on the roundabouts",

WIWAL, the major fairs would have large swings operated by steam. My
memory is telling me that they were large, holding 10 or 12 people, but
the photos I've found look more like 4 or 6 seaters.
http://www.visit.carters-steamfair.co.uk/rides/swingboats/swingboats.html

The roundabouts varied from simple, hand-cranked devices for very small
children, up to the huge carousels with horses that went up and down,
again powered by steam.
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=carousel+fairground&biw=1600&bih=710&tbm=isch&imgil=u_lTBw6eUyu0SM%253A%253BuAMARkk91h4mZM%253Bhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fwww.irvinleisure.co.uk%25252Frides-for-hire%25252Fcarousel%25252F&source=iu&pf=m&fir=u_lTBw6eUyu0SM%253A%252CuAMARkk91h4mZM%252C_&usg=__bM-RehMlkC5bUv8ucwxqto6Z3-I%3D&ved=0ahUKEwjxr-XP4P_JAhXKuhQKHfn-A4QQyjcIMg&ei=7suBVvGABMr1Uvn9j6AI#imgrc=u_lTBw6eUyu0SM%3A&usg=__bM-RehMlkC5bUv8ucwxqto6Z3-I%3D
http://tinyurl.com/po7s4xd

I've not seen a steam fair advertised locally this century, but they do
still exist.

[Mark Brader]

Post by Robin Bignall
WIWAL, the major fairs would have large swings operated by steam.

...

Post by Robin Bignall
I've not seen a steam fair advertised locally this century, but they do
still exist.

Oddly enough, a game I received at Christmas is called "Steam Park".
"Park" in the context of the game means an amusement park, with rides.

[Robin Bignall]

Post by Mark Brader

Post by Robin Bignall
WIWAL, the major fairs would have large swings operated by steam.

...

Post by Robin Bignall
I've not seen a steam fair advertised locally this century, but they do
still exist.

Oddly enough, a game I received at Christmas is called "Steam Park".
"Park" in the context of the game means an amusement park, with rides.

The steam swings I was seeing in my memory are these,
https://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&site=imghp&tbm=isch&source=hp&biw=1600&bih=710&q=steam+swings&oq=steam+swings&gs_l=img.12...10024.16654.0.21340.12.8.0.4.4.0.65.465.8.8.0....0...1ac.1.64.img..2.10.470.VeHktFgSdkw#imgrc=NtCu00isGWnIxM%3A
http://tinyurl.com/hmqzjdz
which are huge, about half the size of a single-decker bus, holding
maybe 20 people.

[s***@gmail.com]

Post by Robin Bignall

Post by Mark Brader

Post by Robin Bignall
WIWAL, the major fairs would have large swings operated by steam.

...

Post by Robin Bignall
I've not seen a steam fair advertised locally this century, but they do
still exist.

Oddly enough, a game I received at Christmas is called "Steam Park".
"Park" in the context of the game means an amusement park, with rides.

The steam swings I was seeing in my memory are these,
https://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&site=imghp&tbm=isch&source=hp&biw=1600&bih=710&q=steam+swings&oq=steam+swings&gs_l=img.12...10024.16654.0.21340.12.8.0.4.4.0.65.465.8.8.0....0...1ac.1.64.img..2.10.470.VeHktFgSdkw#imgrc=NtCu00isGWnIxM%3A
http://tinyurl.com/hmqzjdz
which are huge, about half the size of a single-decker bus, holding
maybe 20 people.

Following one of those thumbnails gets
<URL:Loading Image...>

which looks a lot like our Pirate Boat rides (and various other styles)
<URL:Loading Image...>

(I see that one's called "Dragon Swing")

I'd have guessed something like
<URL:Loading Image...>

I still want to know about the wag[g]ons.

/dps

[s***@gmail.com]

Post by s***@gmail.com

Post by Robin Bignall

Post by Mark Brader

Post by Robin Bignall
WIWAL, the major fairs would have large swings operated by steam.

...

Post by Robin Bignall
I've not seen a steam fair advertised locally this century, but they do
still exist.

Oddly enough, a game I received at Christmas is called "Steam Park".
"Park" in the context of the game means an amusement park, with rides.

The steam swings I was seeing in my memory are these,
https://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&site=imghp&tbm=isch&source=hp&biw=1600&bih=710&q=steam+swings&oq=steam+swings&gs_l=img.12...10024.16654.0.21340.12.8.0.4.4.0.65.465.8.8.0....0...1ac.1.64.img..2.10.470.VeHktFgSdkw#imgrc=NtCu00isGWnIxM%3A
http://tinyurl.com/hmqzjdz
which are huge, about half the size of a single-decker bus, holding
maybe 20 people.

Following one of those thumbnails gets
<URL:http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-hlvoIIF8sa0/UWJ09T9-ywI/AAAAAAAAJ_E/aO9FI6V1nE0/s320/swings3.png>
which looks a lot like our Pirate Boat rides (and various other styles)
<URL:http://jeanhasbeenshopping.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/DragonSwing02.jpg>
(I see that one's called "Dragon Swing")
I'd have guessed something like
<URL:http://static.panoramio.com/photos/large/63919849.jpg>

And then there's
<URL:Loading Image...>

Post by s***@gmail.com
I still want to know about the wag[g]ons.
/dps

[Janet]

Post by s***@gmail.com

Post by Robin Bignall

Post by Mark Brader

Post by Robin Bignall
WIWAL, the major fairs would have large swings operated by steam.

...

Post by Robin Bignall
I've not seen a steam fair advertised locally this century, but they do
still exist.

Oddly enough, a game I received at Christmas is called "Steam Park".
"Park" in the context of the game means an amusement park, with rides.

The steam swings I was seeing in my memory are these,
https://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&site=imghp&tbm=isch&source=hp&biw=1600&bih=710&q=steam+swings&oq=steam+swings&gs_l=img.12...10024.16654.0.21340.12.8.0.4.4.0.65.465.8.8.0....0...1ac.1.64.img..2.10.470.VeHktFgSdkw#imgrc=NtCu00isGWnIxM%3A
http://tinyurl.com/hmqzjdz
which are huge, about half the size of a single-decker bus, holding
maybe 20 people.

Following one of those thumbnails gets
<URL:http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-hlvoIIF8sa0/UWJ09T9-ywI/AAAAAAAAJ_E/aO9FI6V1nE0/s320/swings3.png>
which looks a lot like our Pirate Boat rides (and various other styles)
<URL:http://jeanhasbeenshopping.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/DragonSwing02.jpg>
(I see that one's called "Dragon Swing")
I'd have guessed something like
<URL:http://static.panoramio.com/photos/large/63919849.jpg>
I still want to know about the wag[g]ons.

Going back to the poem you'll see the fair man is described as a
Pharoah. Fairs were commonly run by Gypsies. Gypsy was an abbreviation
of Egyptian, referring to (church) fabled Romany origins there. Hence
"pharoah", another historic name for them.

http://www.contemplator.com/england/pharaoh.html

" Since the first appearanc of Gypsies in Europe (around the fifteenth
century), the Church spread the legend that the Gypsies came out of
Egypt and were cursed becaue they refused to accept the Virgin and
Christ. According to Broadwood, Gypsies came to believe they were
orginally from Egypt and recognized the pharoah as their former king".

Horses and wagons were and remain a major part of Traveller/Gypsy
culture. Well into my lifetime, many of them still travelled by and
lived in ornate wooden horse drawn wagons. Today they live in modern
trailers but they still keep horse drawn wagons and trade in horses, and
converge in their thousands on Appleby in North England for an annual
gypsy horse fair.

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

shows the trad wagons.

https://www.facebook.com/PharoahsGypsyCobs/


Janet.

[s***@gmail.com]

Post by Janet

Post by s***@gmail.com

Post by Robin Bignall

Post by Mark Brader

Post by Robin Bignall
WIWAL, the major fairs would have large swings operated by steam.

...

Post by Robin Bignall
I've not seen a steam fair advertised locally this century, but they do
still exist.

Oddly enough, a game I received at Christmas is called "Steam Park".
"Park" in the context of the game means an amusement park, with rides.

The steam swings I was seeing in my memory are these,
https://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&site=imghp&tbm=isch&source=hp&biw=1600&bih=710&q=steam+swings&oq=steam+swings&gs_l=img.12...10024.16654.0.21340.12.8.0.4.4.0.65.465.8.8.0....0...1ac.1.64.img..2.10.470.VeHktFgSdkw#imgrc=NtCu00isGWnIxM%3A
http://tinyurl.com/hmqzjdz
which are huge, about half the size of a single-decker bus, holding
maybe 20 people.

Following one of those thumbnails gets
<URL:http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-hlvoIIF8sa0/UWJ09T9-ywI/AAAAAAAAJ_E/aO9FI6V1nE0/s320/swings3.png>
which looks a lot like our Pirate Boat rides (and various other styles)
<URL:http://jeanhasbeenshopping.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/DragonSwing02.jpg>
(I see that one's called "Dragon Swing")
I'd have guessed something like
<URL:http://static.panoramio.com/photos/large/63919849.jpg>
I still want to know about the wag[g]ons.

Going back to the poem you'll see the fair man is described as a
Pharoah. Fairs were commonly run by Gypsies. Gypsy was an abbreviation
of Egyptian, referring to (church) fabled Romany origins there. Hence
"pharoah", another historic name for them.
http://www.contemplator.com/england/pharaoh.html
" Since the first appearanc of Gypsies in Europe (around the fifteenth
century), the Church spread the legend that the Gypsies came out of
Egypt and were cursed becaue they refused to accept the Virgin and
Christ. According to Broadwood, Gypsies came to believe they were
orginally from Egypt and recognized the pharoah as their former king".
Horses and wagons were and remain a major part of Traveller/Gypsy
culture. Well into my lifetime, many of them still travelled by and
lived in ornate wooden horse drawn wagons. Today they live in modern
trailers but they still keep horse drawn wagons and trade in horses, and
converge in their thousands on Appleby in North England for an annual
gypsy horse fair.

Sigh. Am I so hard to understand?

Post by Janet
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appleby_Horse_Fair
shows the trad wagons.

There was at least one picture of the trad wagons in that collection.

Post by Janet
https://www.facebook.com/PharoahsGypsyCobs/

No wagons in this one.
We have those horses over here. Brood stock was imported, obviously.
Popular as a driving horse for those who don't want to do Welsh ponies or Hacknies.

The black+white is alleged to have been bred in during WWI or WWII
to make the horses undesirable for the Army. (Your Army, not ours.)

The question I have about the wag[g]ons is: How many were there in the encounter
documented in the poem, and how many teams and drivers were there?

It would be nice to see a wag[g]on with a steam roundabout or swing, also.
I don't think the other poster (PeterWD?) had an obvious link to a ride
that wasn't parked and assembled, but maybe I was too quick.

/dps

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

On Sun, 27 Dec 2015 15:25:22 -0800 (PST), David Kleinecke

Post by David Kleinecke

Post by James Hogg

Post by Katy Jennison

Post by Peter T. Daniels

In article

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Le 27/12/2015 17:39, Katy Jennison a écrit : [about
Chalmers's poem as the origin of the saying "What you lose
on the swings you gain on the roundabouts"]

Post by Katy Jennison
What I'm not entirely convinced of, however, is that the
poem is the origin of the saying, though I see Wikipedia
thinks it is. I've known the saying since my childhood (I
was born the year Chalmers died), but I haven't met the
poem until now. But here's a website about Chalmers and
the relevance of the poem to his other profession of
http://interestingliterature.com/2015/09/03/the-interesting-origins-of-the-phrase-swings-and-roundabouts/

Searching books.google for occurences of "gain on the
roundabouts" or some of its variations, with "made", "made
up", "gained" and so on before 1912, the date of
publication of Chalmers's poem, has proved quite
infuriating as Google mostly provides snippets, which for
the main part seem to come from rather technical
publications, and which are difficult to decipher.

But search "lose on the roundabouts," because you go slower
when driving around a traffic circle than when driving on a
straightaway. That's probably how an American would say it
because that's the explanation we were given for the quaint
British expression.

Sounds to me like a tale told to gullible foreigners.

Because it's a lot more credible than the current explanation.
Which, however, prevails because of the philological principle of
"lectio difficilior."

How is it more credible? As has been demonstrated, the saying is
older than the existence of roundabouts of the traffic variety, and
"swings" has no road-related meaning (as far as I know) in either BrE
or AmE. The fairground terms may be unfamiliar to you, but they've
been common currency for generations of Brits.

And my example from 1908, with no mention of roundabouts and antedating
the existence of road roundabouts, must be enough to convince anyone of

I favor the carnival origin. But I think we cannot assume 1908 is earlier
than traffic roundabouts. Maybe the Romans didn't use traffic roundabouts
but I am certain traffic circles existed in horse-and-buggy days. I think
photos of them (usually with a flag pole in the middle) would be
discovered were one to look for them.

I think the crucial point here is not when did things we would describe
as traffic "roundabouts" exist, but when was the word "roundabout" first
applied to them.

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

On Sun, 27 Dec 2015 15:25:22 -0800 (PST), David Kleinecke

Post by David Kleinecke

Post by James Hogg

Post by Katy Jennison

Post by Peter T. Daniels

In article

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Le 27/12/2015 17:39, Katy Jennison a écrit : [about
Chalmers's poem as the origin of the saying "What you lose
on the swings you gain on the roundabouts"]

Post by Katy Jennison
What I'm not entirely convinced of, however, is that the
poem is the origin of the saying, though I see Wikipedia
thinks it is. I've known the saying since my childhood (I
was born the year Chalmers died), but I haven't met the
poem until now. But here's a website about Chalmers and
the relevance of the poem to his other profession of
http://interestingliterature.com/2015/09/03/the-interesting-origins-of-the-phrase-swings-and-roundabouts/

Searching books.google for occurences of "gain on the
roundabouts" or some of its variations, with "made", "made
up", "gained" and so on before 1912, the date of
publication of Chalmers's poem, has proved quite
infuriating as Google mostly provides snippets, which for
the main part seem to come from rather technical
publications, and which are difficult to decipher.

But search "lose on the roundabouts," because you go slower
when driving around a traffic circle than when driving on a
straightaway. That's probably how an American would say it
because that's the explanation we were given for the quaint
British expression.

Sounds to me like a tale told to gullible foreigners.

Because it's a lot more credible than the current explanation.
Which, however, prevails because of the philological principle of
"lectio difficilior."

How is it more credible? As has been demonstrated, the saying is
older than the existence of roundabouts of the traffic variety, and
"swings" has no road-related meaning (as far as I know) in either BrE
or AmE. The fairground terms may be unfamiliar to you, but they've
been common currency for generations of Brits.

And my example from 1908, with no mention of roundabouts and antedating
the existence of road roundabouts, must be enough to convince anyone of

I favor the carnival origin. But I think we cannot assume 1908 is earlier
than traffic roundabouts. Maybe the Romans didn't use traffic roundabouts
but I am certain traffic circles existed in horse-and-buggy days. I think
photos of them (usually with a flag pole in the middle) would be
discovered were one to look for them.

ObCarnival: The word "carnival" seems to have a meaning in AmE that is
doesn't have in OtherE.
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/american_english/carnival

carnival

noun
1 A period of public revelry at a regular time each year, typically
during the week before Lent in Roman Catholic countries, involving
processions, music, dancing, and the use of masquerade:

2 North American A traveling amusement show or circus.

OED:

carnival, n.

Etymology: < Italian carnevale, carnovale (whence French carnaval),
evidently related to the medieval Latin (11–12th cent.) names
carnelevarium, carnilevaria, carnilevamen, cited by Carpentier in
additions to Du Cange. These appear to originate in a Latin *carnem
levare, or Italian *carne levare (with infinitive used subst. as in
il levar del sole sunrise), meaning ‘the putting away or removal of
flesh (as food)’, the name being originally proper to the eve of Ash
Wednesday. The actual Italian carnevale appears to have come through
the intermediate carnelevale, cited by Carpentier from a document of
1130.

1. The season immediately preceding Lent, devoted in Italy and other
Roman Catholic countries to revelry and riotous amusement,
Shrove-tide; the festivity of this season. High Carnival: the
revelry of the Carnival at its height.

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

Carnival (see other spellings and names) is a festive season that
occurs before the Christian season of Lent. The main events
typically occur during February or early March. Carnival typically
involves a public celebration and/or parade combining some elements
of a circus, masks and public street party. People wear masks during
many such celebrations, an overturning of life's normal things. The
celebrations have long been associated with heavy alcohol
consumption.

In various cultures carnivals are now purely secular events.

In the UK today, "carnival" usually means a parade based on or deriving
from Caribbean tradition.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caribbean_Carnival#United_Kingdom

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

The Notting Hill Carnival is an annual event that since 1966 has
taken place on the streets of Notting Hill, Royal Borough of
Kensington and Chelsea, London, England, each August over two days
(the August bank holiday Monday and the preceding Sunday). It is led
by members of the British West Indian community, and attracts around
one million people annually, making it one of the world's largest
street festivals, and a significant event in British culture. In
2006, the UK public voted it onto the list of icons of England.
Despite its name, it is not part of the global Carnival season
preceding Lent.

[Janet]

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Janet

Post by Isabelle C
[about Chalmers's poem as the origin of the saying "What you lose on the
swings you gain on the roundabouts"]

Post by Katy Jennison
What I'm not entirely convinced of, however, is that the poem is the
origin of the saying, though I see Wikipedia thinks it is. I've known
the saying since my childhood (I was born the year Chalmers died), but I
haven't met the poem until now. But here's a website about Chalmers and
http://interestingliterature.com/2015/09/03/the-interesting-origins-of-the-phrase-swings-and-roundabouts/

Searching books.google for occurences of "gain on the roundabouts" or
some of its variations, with "made", "made up", "gained" and so on
before 1912, the date of publication of Chalmers's poem, has proved
quite infuriating as Google mostly provides snippets, which for the main
part seem to come from rather technical publications, and which are
difficult to decipher.

But search "lose on the roundabouts," because you go slower when driving
around a traffic circle than when driving on a straightaway. That's probably
how an American would say it because that's the explanation we were given
for the quaint British expression.
Plus, the prosody is better: ending on a single strong syllable rather than
two weak syllables of a three-syllable word.

Post by Janet

Post by Isabelle C
The first one is to be found in Fore's Sporting Notes & Sketches,
published in 1907
http://www.forgottenbooks.com/readbook_text/Fores_Sporting_Notes_Sketches_v10_1000518999/301
"It should be possible for a racecourse to pay its way, even if a
sovereign only were charged to cover all admission expenses, and
probably less than that. What would be lost on the swings would be
gained on the roundabouts"

literal.

Post by Janet

Post by Isabelle C
The second quote is taken from Via Rhodesia; a journey through Southern
Africa, by Charlotte Mansfield, published in 1911. It's on page 77. The
"In Salisbury what one loses on the cocoanut shies one makes up on the
roundabouts; one may complain of the unnecessary space between the
public buildings for a busy man or woman, but no one can find fault wuth
the delightful sports grounds..."
I don't know if the "cocoanut shies" is Charlotte Mansfield's own
invention or if, as I suspect, it is an alternative version of the
saying as we know it and which she repeated.
I'd say we're firmly on carnival ground here.

again, literal. But why would it have escaped into proverbial use?

Post by Janet
Coconut shies are a classic component of travelling fairgrounds in UK
Coconuts are balanced on a stand, you pay to try to knock them off by
throwing (shying) a ball. In my childhood, if you knocked off a coconut
you could either win the coconut or a live goldfish.

Take the coconunt. It'll last longer.

I always chose the fish. I knew my Dad would win a coconut :-)

Janet

[charles]

Post by Janet

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Janet

Le 27/12/2015 17:39, Katy Jennison a écrit : [about Chalmers's poem
as the origin of the saying "What you lose on the swings you gain
on the roundabouts"]

Post by Katy Jennison
What I'm not entirely convinced of, however, is that the poem is
the origin of the saying, though I see Wikipedia thinks it is.
I've known the saying since my childhood (I was born the year
Chalmers died), but I haven't met the poem until now. But
here's a website about Chalmers and the relevance of the poem to
http://interestingliterature.com/2015/09/03/the-interesting-origins-of-the-phrase-swings-and-roundabouts/

Searching books.google for occurences of "gain on the roundabouts"
or some of its variations, with "made", "made up", "gained" and so
on before 1912, the date of publication of Chalmers's poem, has
proved quite infuriating as Google mostly provides snippets, which
for the main part seem to come from rather technical publications,
and which are difficult to decipher.

But search "lose on the roundabouts," because you go slower when
driving around a traffic circle than when driving on a straightaway.
That's probably how an American would say it because that's the
explanation we were given for the quaint British expression.
Plus, the prosody is better: ending on a single strong syllable rather
than two weak syllables of a three-syllable word.

Post by Janet

Two quotes which I found interesting and which both predate
Chalmers's poem: The first one is to be found in Fore's Sporting
Notes & Sketches, published in 1907
http://www.forgottenbooks.com/readbook_text/Fores_Sporting_Notes_Sketches_v10_1000518999/301
"It should be possible for a racecourse to pay its way, even if a
sovereign only were charged to cover all admission expenses, and
probably less than that. What would be lost on the swings would be
gained on the roundabouts"

literal.

Post by Janet

The second quote is taken from Via Rhodesia; a journey through
Southern Africa, by Charlotte Mansfield, published in 1911. It's on
page 77. The author describes Salisbury: "In Salisbury what one
loses on the cocoanut shies one makes up on the roundabouts; one
may complain of the unnecessary space between the public buildings
for a busy man or woman, but no one can find fault wuth the
delightful sports grounds..." I don't know if the "cocoanut shies"
is Charlotte Mansfield's own invention or if, as I suspect, it is
an alternative version of the saying as we know it and which she
repeated. I'd say we're firmly on carnival ground here.

again, literal. But why would it have escaped into proverbial use?

Post by Janet
Coconut shies are a classic component of travelling fairgrounds in
UK Coconuts are balanced on a stand, you pay to try to knock them off
by throwing (shying) a ball. In my childhood, if you knocked off a
coconut you could either win the coconut or a live goldfish.

Take the coconunt. It'll last longer.

I always chose the fish. I knew my Dad would win a coconut :-)
Janet

we got coconuts with a stamp on the outside sent by my dad when he was
stationed in West Africa during WW2

[Tony Cooper]

Post by Janet

Post by Isabelle C
I'd say we're firmly on carnival ground here.

Coconut shies are a classic component of travelling fairgrounds in UK
Coconuts are balanced on a stand, you pay to try to knock them off by
throwing (shying) a ball. In my childhood, if you knocked off a coconut
you could either win the coconut or a live goldfish.
Janet.

Not that I'm relating it to this discussion, but we have the same
"game of skill" at our fairs. Instead of coconuts, they are usually
stacked (what look like) pint milk bottles. They are actually
concrete or some other heavy material.

Loading Image...

The above photo shows six, but the arrangement I've seen usually has
just three. The object is to throw three balls at the stack and knock
all three bottles completely off the platform. At least one of the
bottles on the bottom will be so heavy that it's almost impossible to
dislodge it from the platform. It doesn't count just to knock down
the stack; the bottles must be knocked completely off the supporting
platform.

We don't have the word "shies/shying", though.

Also related, many Americans have heard the song "I've got a lovely
bunch of coconuts" with the words "a penny a pitch", we might know the
coconut connection.

The song was in a Judy Garland movie ("I Could Go On Singing"), but I
don't know the context.

Another American connection:

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Tony Cooper

Post by Janet

Post by Isabelle C
I'd say we're firmly on carnival ground here.

Coconut shies are a classic component of travelling fairgrounds in UK
Coconuts are balanced on a stand, you pay to try to knock them off by
throwing (shying) a ball. In my childhood, if you knocked off a coconut
you could either win the coconut or a live goldfish.

Not that I'm relating it to this discussion, but we have the same
"game of skill" at our fairs. Instead of coconuts, they are usually
stacked (what look like) pint milk bottles. They are actually
concrete or some other heavy material.
http://www.unitedrent-all-omaha.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/milkbottletoss-530x552.jpg
The above photo shows six, but the arrangement I've seen usually has
just three. The object is to throw three balls at the stack and knock
all three bottles completely off the platform. At least one of the
bottles on the bottom will be so heavy that it's almost impossible to
dislodge it from the platform. It doesn't count just to knock down
the stack; the bottles must be knocked completely off the supporting
platform.
We don't have the word "shies/shying", though.

Of course _we_ do. Maybe you don't in Orlando. I probably first saw it in
Mark Twain, i.e. originating fairly close to Hoosierland.

Post by Tony Cooper
Also related, many Americans have heard the song "I've got a lovely
bunch of coconuts" with the words "a penny a pitch", we might know the
coconut connection.

Tropical-themed musicals and scenes in musicals were very common in 30s and
40s musicals. Maybe you've heard of Carmen Miranda.

Post by Tony Cooper
The song was in a Judy Garland movie ("I Could Go On Singing"), but I
don't know the context.
http://youtu.be/nf670orHKcA

[Tony Cooper]

On Sun, 27 Dec 2015 14:00:00 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Tony Cooper

Post by Janet

Post by Isabelle C
I'd say we're firmly on carnival ground here.

Coconut shies are a classic component of travelling fairgrounds in UK
Coconuts are balanced on a stand, you pay to try to knock them off by
throwing (shying) a ball. In my childhood, if you knocked off a coconut
you could either win the coconut or a live goldfish.

Not that I'm relating it to this discussion, but we have the same
"game of skill" at our fairs. Instead of coconuts, they are usually
stacked (what look like) pint milk bottles. They are actually
concrete or some other heavy material.
http://www.unitedrent-all-omaha.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/milkbottletoss-530x552.jpg
The above photo shows six, but the arrangement I've seen usually has
just three. The object is to throw three balls at the stack and knock
all three bottles completely off the platform. At least one of the
bottles on the bottom will be so heavy that it's almost impossible to
dislodge it from the platform. It doesn't count just to knock down
the stack; the bottles must be knocked completely off the supporting
platform.
We don't have the word "shies/shying", though.

Of course _we_ do. Maybe you don't in Orlando. I probably first saw it in
Mark Twain, i.e. originating fairly close to Hoosierland.

Post by Tony Cooper
Also related, many Americans have heard the song "I've got a lovely
bunch of coconuts" with the words "a penny a pitch", we might know the
coconut connection.

Tropical-themed musicals and scenes in musicals were very common in 30s and
40s musicals. Maybe you've heard of Carmen Miranda.

You are a master of the non sequitur. The song "I've got a lovely
bunch of coconuts" is not from a tropical-themed musical. Not unless
you consider "an English fair" to be a tropical setting.

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Tony Cooper
The song was in a Judy Garland movie ("I Could Go On Singing"), but I
don't know the context.
http://youtu.be/nf670orHKcA

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Tony Cooper
On Sun, 27 Dec 2015 14:00:00 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Tony Cooper

Post by Janet

Post by Isabelle C
I'd say we're firmly on carnival ground here.

Coconut shies are a classic component of travelling fairgrounds in UK
Coconuts are balanced on a stand, you pay to try to knock them off by
throwing (shying) a ball. In my childhood, if you knocked off a coconut
you could either win the coconut or a live goldfish.

Not that I'm relating it to this discussion, but we have the same
"game of skill" at our fairs. Instead of coconuts, they are usually
stacked (what look like) pint milk bottles. They are actually
concrete or some other heavy material.
http://www.unitedrent-all-omaha.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/milkbottletoss-530x552.jpg
The above photo shows six, but the arrangement I've seen usually has
just three. The object is to throw three balls at the stack and knock
all three bottles completely off the platform. At least one of the
bottles on the bottom will be so heavy that it's almost impossible to
dislodge it from the platform. It doesn't count just to knock down
the stack; the bottles must be knocked completely off the supporting
platform.
We don't have the word "shies/shying", though.

Of course _we_ do. Maybe you don't in Orlando. I probably first saw it in
Mark Twain, i.e. originating fairly close to Hoosierland.

Post by Tony Cooper
Also related, many Americans have heard the song "I've got a lovely
bunch of coconuts" with the words "a penny a pitch", we might know the
coconut connection.

Tropical-themed musicals and scenes in musicals were very common in 30s and
40s musicals. Maybe you've heard of Carmen Miranda.

You are a master of the non sequitur. The song "I've got a lovely
bunch of coconuts" is not from a tropical-themed musical. Not unless
you consider "an English fair" to be a tropical setting.

You are _still_ a master of inability to comprehend a generalization.

Post by Tony Cooper

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Tony Cooper
The song was in a Judy Garland movie ("I Could Go On Singing"), but I
don't know the context.

So you don't know (a) that it isn't from a tropical-themed scene or (b) that
it was written for that movie.

Given that it was an anthology film --

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

and her last movie --

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0057168/

and doesn't seem to include the song in question --

http://www.jgdb.com/singing.htm

I wonder why you mentioned it.

Especially since it happens to be an _English_, not an American song, though
it was a US hit for both Merv Griffin and Danny Kaye --

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I%27ve_Got_a_Lovely_Bunch_of_Coconuts

Why this article mentions the Garland movie when two presumably authoritative
sites (and a fellow wikiparticle) do not is a puzzlement.

Post by Tony Cooper

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Tony Cooper
http://youtu.be/nf670orHKcA

[Tony Cooper]

On Sun, 27 Dec 2015 20:31:49 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Tony Cooper
You are a master of the non sequitur. The song "I've got a lovely
bunch of coconuts" is not from a tropical-themed musical. Not unless
you consider "an English fair" to be a tropical setting.

You are _still_ a master of inability to comprehend a generalization.

Post by Tony Cooper

Post by Tony Cooper
The song was in a Judy Garland movie ("I Could Go On Singing"), but I
don't know the context.

So you don't know (a) that it isn't from a tropical-themed scene or (b) that
it was written for that movie.
Given that it was an anthology film --
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Could_Go_On_Singing
and her last movie --
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0057168/
and doesn't seem to include the song in question --
http://www.jgdb.com/singing.htm
I wonder why you mentioned it.
Especially since it happens to be an _English_, not an American song, though
it was a US hit for both Merv Griffin and Danny Kaye --

I sometimes have great trouble thinking of you as anything resembling
a "scholar" as you are described. It would seem to me that "scholars"
are at least minimally capable of fact-checking statements before they
blurt them out.

The plot of the movie "I Could Go On Singing" is that singer "Jenny
Bowman" travels to London (that's in England, not in southern
Illinois) for a big show at the Palladium. London (the one in
England) is not considered to be a tropical setting, and English songs
are quite often heard in England.

The song appears at :30:40 into the movie. Enter "lovely bunch of
coconuts" in the search box.

http://www.cswap.com/1963/I_Could_Go_on_Singing

What gets me is that you've linked to a page that describes the plot,
but have not twigged to the fact that an English song might be
included in the movie. Evidently, you don't read what you link to.

Post by Peter T. Daniels
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I%27ve_Got_a_Lovely_Bunch_of_Coconuts
Why this article mentions the Garland movie when two presumably authoritative
sites (and a fellow wikiparticle) do not is a puzzlement.

Could it be because it's a minor aspect of the movie and only the
major aspects are mentioned by your authoritative sources?

It was not written for the movie unless Box, Cox, and Ilda composed it
19 years before the movie was made thinking it might be right for the
scene with "Jenny" inviting her son to her performance.

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Tony Cooper
On Sun, 27 Dec 2015 20:31:49 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Tony Cooper
You are a master of the non sequitur. The song "I've got a lovely
bunch of coconuts" is not from a tropical-themed musical. Not unless
you consider "an English fair" to be a tropical setting.

You are _still_ a master of inability to comprehend a generalization.

Post by Tony Cooper

Post by Tony Cooper
The song was in a Judy Garland movie ("I Could Go On Singing"), but I
don't know the context.

So you don't know (a) that it isn't from a tropical-themed scene or (b) that
it was written for that movie.
Given that it was an anthology film --
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Could_Go_On_Singing
and her last movie --
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0057168/
and doesn't seem to include the song in question --
http://www.jgdb.com/singing.htm
I wonder why you mentioned it.
Especially since it happens to be an _English_, not an American song, though
it was a US hit for both Merv Griffin and Danny Kaye --

I sometimes have great trouble thinking of you as anything resembling
a "scholar" as you are described. It would seem to me that "scholars"
are at least minimally capable of fact-checking statements before they
blurt them out.
The plot of the movie "I Could Go On Singing" is that singer "Jenny
Bowman" travels to London (that's in England, not in southern
Illinois) for a big show at the Palladium. London (the one in
England) is not considered to be a tropical setting, and English songs
are quite often heard in England.
The song appears at :30:40 into the movie. Enter "lovely bunch of
coconuts" in the search box.
http://www.cswap.com/1963/I_Could_Go_on_Singing
What gets me is that you've linked to a page that describes the plot,
but have not twigged to the fact that an English song might be
included in the movie. Evidently, you don't read what you link to.

Post by Peter T. Daniels
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I%27ve_Got_a_Lovely_Bunch_of_Coconuts
Why this article mentions the Garland movie when two presumably authoritative
sites (and a fellow wikiparticle) do not is a puzzlement.

Could it be because it's a minor aspect of the movie and only the
major aspects are mentioned by your authoritative sources?

You mean, in a "list of musical numbers"?

Post by Tony Cooper
It was not written for the movie unless Box, Cox, and Ilda composed it
19 years before the movie was made thinking it might be right for the
scene with "Jenny" inviting her son to her performance.

Which is precisely why it is _not_ evidence of US familiarity with "coconut-
shying"!!!!!! The movie _itself_ was made in England by English creators.

[Tony Cooper]

On Mon, 28 Dec 2015 04:41:47 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Tony Cooper
On Sun, 27 Dec 2015 20:31:49 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Tony Cooper
You are a master of the non sequitur. The song "I've got a lovely
bunch of coconuts" is not from a tropical-themed musical. Not unless
you consider "an English fair" to be a tropical setting.

You are _still_ a master of inability to comprehend a generalization.

Post by Tony Cooper

Post by Tony Cooper
The song was in a Judy Garland movie ("I Could Go On Singing"), but I
don't know the context.

So you don't know (a) that it isn't from a tropical-themed scene or (b) that
it was written for that movie.
Given that it was an anthology film --
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Could_Go_On_Singing
and her last movie --
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0057168/
and doesn't seem to include the song in question --
http://www.jgdb.com/singing.htm
I wonder why you mentioned it.
Especially since it happens to be an _English_, not an American song, though
it was a US hit for both Merv Griffin and Danny Kaye --

I sometimes have great trouble thinking of you as anything resembling
a "scholar" as you are described. It would seem to me that "scholars"
are at least minimally capable of fact-checking statements before they
blurt them out.
The plot of the movie "I Could Go On Singing" is that singer "Jenny
Bowman" travels to London (that's in England, not in southern
Illinois) for a big show at the Palladium. London (the one in
England) is not considered to be a tropical setting, and English songs
are quite often heard in England.
The song appears at :30:40 into the movie. Enter "lovely bunch of
coconuts" in the search box.
http://www.cswap.com/1963/I_Could_Go_on_Singing
What gets me is that you've linked to a page that describes the plot,
but have not twigged to the fact that an English song might be
included in the movie. Evidently, you don't read what you link to.

Post by Peter T. Daniels
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I%27ve_Got_a_Lovely_Bunch_of_Coconuts
Why this article mentions the Garland movie when two presumably authoritative
sites (and a fellow wikiparticle) do not is a puzzlement.

Could it be because it's a minor aspect of the movie and only the
major aspects are mentioned by your authoritative sources?

You mean, in a "list of musical numbers"?

In the source provided, it seems that Garland broke into song during
the meeting with her son and his father, but it may not have reached
the "musical number" status if not instrumentally accompanied.

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Tony Cooper
It was not written for the movie unless Box, Cox, and Ilda composed it
19 years before the movie was made thinking it might be right for the
scene with "Jenny" inviting her son to her performance.

Which is precisely why it is _not_ evidence of US familiarity with "coconut-
shying"!!!!!! The movie _itself_ was made in England by English creators.

How have you come around to this gem? What has been said by anyone
that indicates there is US familiarity with "coconut shying"? There
is familiarity with the song to those of a certain age, and there is
familiarity with the concept to any American who has seen the milk
bottle toss at a fair, but what deserves six !s?

[Peter T. Daniels]

Post by Tony Cooper
On Mon, 28 Dec 2015 04:41:47 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Tony Cooper
On Sun, 27 Dec 2015 20:31:49 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Tony Cooper
You are a master of the non sequitur. The song "I've got a lovely
bunch of coconuts" is not from a tropical-themed musical. Not unless
you consider "an English fair" to be a tropical setting.

You are _still_ a master of inability to comprehend a generalization.

Post by Tony Cooper

Post by Tony Cooper
The song was in a Judy Garland movie ("I Could Go On Singing"), but I
don't know the context.

So you don't know (a) that it isn't from a tropical-themed scene or (b) that
it was written for that movie.
Given that it was an anthology film --
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Could_Go_On_Singing
and her last movie --
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0057168/
and doesn't seem to include the song in question --
http://www.jgdb.com/singing.htm
I wonder why you mentioned it.
Especially since it happens to be an _English_, not an American song, though
it was a US hit for both Merv Griffin and Danny Kaye --

I sometimes have great trouble thinking of you as anything resembling
a "scholar" as you are described. It would seem to me that "scholars"
are at least minimally capable of fact-checking statements before they
blurt them out.
The plot of the movie "I Could Go On Singing" is that singer "Jenny
Bowman" travels to London (that's in England, not in southern
Illinois) for a big show at the Palladium. London (the one in
England) is not considered to be a tropical setting, and English songs
are quite often heard in England.
The song appears at :30:40 into the movie. Enter "lovely bunch of
coconuts" in the search box.
http://www.cswap.com/1963/I_Could_Go_on_Singing
What gets me is that you've linked to a page that describes the plot,
but have not twigged to the fact that an English song might be
included in the movie. Evidently, you don't read what you link to.

Post by Peter T. Daniels
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I%27ve_Got_a_Lovely_Bunch_of_Coconuts
Why this article mentions the Garland movie when two presumably authoritative
sites (and a fellow wikiparticle) do not is a puzzlement.

Could it be because it's a minor aspect of the movie and only the
major aspects are mentioned by your authoritative sources?

You mean, in a "list of musical numbers"?

In the source provided, it seems that Garland broke into song during
the meeting with her son and his father, but it may not have reached
the "musical number" status if not instrumentally accompanied.

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Tony Cooper
It was not written for the movie unless Box, Cox, and Ilda composed it
19 years before the movie was made thinking it might be right for the
scene with "Jenny" inviting her son to her performance.

Which is precisely why it is _not_ evidence of US familiarity with "coconut-
shying"!!!!!! The movie _itself_ was made in England by English creators.

How have you come around to this gem? What has been said by anyone
that indicates there is US familiarity with "coconut shying"? There
is familiarity with the song to those of a certain age, and there is
familiarity with the concept to any American who has seen the milk
bottle toss at a fair, but what deserves six !s?

BECAUSE YOU CITED THE SONG AS EVIDENCE IN THE DISCUSSION !!!!!!!

And strongly implied that it was written for and is associated with and
would be known from Judy Garland, though you have very conveniently deleted
the remarks.

[Tony Cooper]

On Mon, 28 Dec 2015 06:26:08 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Tony Cooper
On Mon, 28 Dec 2015 04:41:47 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Tony Cooper
On Sun, 27 Dec 2015 20:31:49 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Tony Cooper
You are a master of the non sequitur. The song "I've got a lovely
bunch of coconuts" is not from a tropical-themed musical. Not unless
you consider "an English fair" to be a tropical setting.

You are _still_ a master of inability to comprehend a generalization.

Post by Tony Cooper

Post by Tony Cooper
The song was in a Judy Garland movie ("I Could Go On Singing"), but I
don't know the context.

So you don't know (a) that it isn't from a tropical-themed scene or (b) that
it was written for that movie.
Given that it was an anthology film --
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Could_Go_On_Singing
and her last movie --
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0057168/
and doesn't seem to include the song in question --
http://www.jgdb.com/singing.htm
I wonder why you mentioned it.
Especially since it happens to be an _English_, not an American song, though
it was a US hit for both Merv Griffin and Danny Kaye --

I sometimes have great trouble thinking of you as anything resembling
a "scholar" as you are described. It would seem to me that "scholars"
are at least minimally capable of fact-checking statements before they
blurt them out.
The plot of the movie "I Could Go On Singing" is that singer "Jenny
Bowman" travels to London (that's in England, not in southern
Illinois) for a big show at the Palladium. London (the one in
England) is not considered to be a tropical setting, and English songs
are quite often heard in England.
The song appears at :30:40 into the movie. Enter "lovely bunch of
coconuts" in the search box.
http://www.cswap.com/1963/I_Could_Go_on_Singing
What gets me is that you've linked to a page that describes the plot,
but have not twigged to the fact that an English song might be
included in the movie. Evidently, you don't read what you link to.

Post by Peter T. Daniels
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I%27ve_Got_a_Lovely_Bunch_of_Coconuts
Why this article mentions the Garland movie when two presumably authoritative
sites (and a fellow wikiparticle) do not is a puzzlement.

Could it be because it's a minor aspect of the movie and only the
major aspects are mentioned by your authoritative sources?

You mean, in a "list of musical numbers"?

In the source provided, it seems that Garland broke into song during
the meeting with her son and his father, but it may not have reached
the "musical number" status if not instrumentally accompanied.

Post by Peter T. Daniels

Post by Tony Cooper
It was not written for the movie unless Box, Cox, and Ilda composed it
19 years before the movie was made thinking it might be right for the
scene with "Jenny" inviting her son to her performance.

Which is precisely why it is _not_ evidence of US familiarity with "coconut-
shying"!!!!!! The movie _itself_ was made in England by English creators.

How have you come around to this gem? What has been said by anyone
that indicates there is US familiarity with "coconut shying"? There
is familiarity with the song to those of a certain age, and there is
familiarity with the concept to any American who has seen the milk
bottle toss at a fair, but what deserves six !s?

BECAUSE YOU CITED THE SONG AS EVIDENCE IN THE DISCUSSION !!!!!!!

Now what? Evidence? All I said was "The song was in a Judy Garland
movie ("I Could Go On Singing"), but I don't know the context."

Post by Peter T. Daniels
And strongly implied that it was written for and is associated with and
would be known from Judy Garland, though you have very conveniently deleted
the remarks.

How is that a strong implication of anything other than it was in a
movie? What a strange conclusion to jump to.

[Janet]

In article <***@4ax.com>, tonycooper214
@gmail.com says...

Post by Tony Cooper

Post by Janet

Post by Isabelle C
I'd say we're firmly on carnival ground here.

Coconut shies are a classic component of travelling fairgrounds in UK
Coconuts are balanced on a stand, you pay to try to knock them off by
throwing (shying) a ball. In my childhood, if you knocked off a coconut
you could either win the coconut or a live goldfish.
Janet.

Not that I'm relating it to this discussion, but we have the same
"game of skill" at our fairs. Instead of coconuts, they are usually
stacked (what look like) pint milk bottles. They are actually
concrete or some other heavy material.
http://www.unitedrent-all-omaha.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/milkbottletoss-530x552.jpg
The above photo shows six, but the arrangement I've seen usually has
just three. The object is to throw three balls at the stack and knock
all three bottles completely off the platform. At least one of the
bottles on the bottom will be so heavy that it's almost impossible to
dislodge it from the platform. It doesn't count just to knock down
the stack; the bottles must be knocked completely off the supporting
platform.
We don't have the word "shies/shying", though.
Also related, many Americans have heard the song "I've got a lovely
bunch of coconuts" with the words "a penny a pitch", we might know the
coconut connection.
The song was in a Judy Garland movie ("I Could Go On Singing"), but I
don't know the context.
http://youtu.be/nf670orHKcA

I went to a tiny village fair last summer, where they had a stall with
chipped and cracked old cups and plates balanced on each other into
towers 5 or 6 high. There was a sweetie in each top cup. If children
managed to hit the tower with a ball it would collapse with a satisfying
smash, child gets the sweet that fell out, any plates and cups that
didn't break are built into new towers. Looked like a great little
community fund-raiser.

Janet.

[charles]

Post by Janet
@gmail.com says...

Post by Tony Cooper

Post by Janet

Post by Isabelle C
I'd say we're firmly on carnival ground here.

Coconut shies are a classic component of travelling fairgrounds in UK
Coconuts are balanced on a stand, you pay to try to knock them off by
throwing (shying) a ball. In my childhood, if you knocked off a coconut
you could either win the coconut or a live goldfish.
Janet.

Not that I'm relating it to this discussion, but we have the same
"game of skill" at our fairs. Instead of coconuts, they are usually
stacked (what look like) pint milk bottles. They are actually
concrete or some other heavy material.
http://www.unitedrent-all-omaha.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/milkbottletoss-530x552.jpg
The above photo shows six, but the arrangement I've seen usually has
just three. The object is to throw three balls at the stack and knock
all three bottles completely off the platform. At least one of the
bottles on the bottom will be so heavy that it's almost impossible to
dislodge it from the platform. It doesn't count just to knock down
the stack; the bottles must be knocked completely off the supporting
platform.
We don't have the word "shies/shying", though.
Also related, many Americans have heard the song "I've got a lovely
bunch of coconuts" with the words "a penny a pitch", we might know the
coconut connection.
The song was in a Judy Garland movie ("I Could Go On Singing"), but I
don't know the context.
http://youtu.be/nf670orHKcA

I went to a tiny village fair last summer, where they had a stall with
chipped and cracked old cups and plates balanced on each other into
towers 5 or 6 high. There was a sweetie in each top cup. If children
managed to hit the tower with a ball it would collapse with a satisfying
smash, child gets the sweet that fell out, any plates and cups that
didn't break are built into new towers. Looked like a great little
community fund-raiser.

The Safety Elf would have a fit round here.

[RH Draney]

Post by Janet
Coconut shies are a classic component of travelling fairgrounds in UK
Coconuts are balanced on a stand, you pay to try to knock them off by
throwing (shying) a ball. In my childhood, if you knocked off a coconut
you could either win the coconut or a live goldfish.

I've got a lovely bunch....r

[James Hogg]

Post by Isabelle C
[about Chalmers's poem as the origin of the saying "What you lose on the
swings you gain on the roundabouts"]

Post by Katy Jennison
What I'm not entirely convinced of, however, is that the poem is the
origin of the saying, though I see Wikipedia thinks it is. I've known
the saying since my childhood (I was born the year Chalmers died), but I
haven't met the poem until now. But here's a website about Chalmers and
http://interestingliterature.com/2015/09/03/the-interesting-origins-of-the-phrase-swings-and-roundabouts/

Searching books.google for occurences of "gain on the roundabouts" or
some of its variations, with "made", "made up", "gained" and so on
before 1912, the date of publication of Chalmers's poem, has proved
quite infuriating as Google mostly provides snippets, which for the main
part seem to come from rather technical publications, and which are
difficult to decipher.
The first one is to be found in Fore's Sporting Notes & Sketches,
published in 1907
http://www.forgottenbooks.com/readbook_text/Fores_Sporting_Notes_Sketches_v10_1000518999/301
"It should be possible for a racecourse to pay its way, even if a
sovereign only were charged to cover all admission expenses, and
probably less than that. What would be lost on the swings would be
gained on the roundabouts"
The second quote is taken from Via Rhodesia; a journey through Southern
Africa, by Charlotte Mansfield, published in 1911. It's on page 77. The
"In Salisbury what one loses on the cocoanut shies one makes up on the
roundabouts; one may complain of the unnecessary space between the
public buildings for a busy man or woman, but no one can find fault wuth
the delightful sports grounds..."
I don't know if the "cocoanut shies" is Charlotte Mansfield's own
invention or if, as I suspect, it is an alternative version of the
saying as we know it and which she repeated.
I'd say we're firmly on carnival ground here.

Indeed. Another variant, this time completely roundabout-free, from 1908:
"What one loses on the cocoanuts one makes up for on the swings."

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

On Sun, 27 Dec 2015 20:38:50 +0100, Isabelle C

Post by Isabelle C
[about Chalmers's poem as the origin of the saying "What you lose on the
swings you gain on the roundabouts"]

Post by Katy Jennison
What I'm not entirely convinced of, however, is that the poem is the
origin of the saying, though I see Wikipedia thinks it is. I've known
the saying since my childhood (I was born the year Chalmers died), but I
haven't met the poem until now. But here's a website about Chalmers and
http://interestingliterature.com/2015/09/03/the-interesting-origins-of-the-phrase-swings-and-roundabouts/

Searching books.google for occurences of "gain on the roundabouts" or
some of its variations, with "made", "made up", "gained" and so on
before 1912, the date of publication of Chalmers's poem, has proved
quite infuriating as Google mostly provides snippets, which for the main
part seem to come from rather technical publications, and which are
difficult to decipher.
The first one is to be found in Fore's Sporting Notes & Sketches,
published in 1907
http://www.forgottenbooks.com/readbook_text/Fores_Sporting_Notes_Sketches_v10_1000518999/301
"It should be possible for a racecourse to pay its way, even if a
sovereign only were charged to cover all admission expenses, and
probably less than that. What would be lost on the swings would be
gained on the roundabouts"
The second quote is taken from Via Rhodesia; a journey through Southern
Africa, by Charlotte Mansfield, published in 1911. It's on page 77. The
"In Salisbury what one loses on the cocoanut shies one makes up on the
roundabouts; one may complain of the unnecessary space between the
public buildings for a busy man or woman, but no one can find fault wuth
the delightful sports grounds..."
I don't know if the "cocoanut shies" is Charlotte Mansfield's own
invention or if, as I suspect, it is an alternative version of the
saying as we know it and which she repeated.
I'd say we're firmly on carnival ground here.

Yes.

There might have been several sayings of the same type referring to
different fairground rides and attractions. Different groups of showmen
might have had their own versions.

[Snidely]

Remember when Zoroaster ragged on us outrageously? That was Sunday:

[My post elided]

Post by Zoroaster
Here, I was surprised to see that so many posters not only didn't know the
source (although one did!) but also confused the issue (such as the post I've
quoted here).

It's a nice poem, but I'm likely to pick a Frost piece ahead of it for
greatest ever ("Fog", say). Maybe even a Blake, although "Tiger,
Tiger" is the only one I've memorized.

As to confusing the issue: Huh, what confusion? I completely accept
the fairground origin of the phrase (I recognized swings and
roundabouts as fairground staples), and others in this branch have
enhanced this acceptance. I made bold to claim that this didn't seem
like the genesis of the phrase, though it might have proven to be the
first time in print (later shown not the case).

But perhaps you were confused by speculation as to the nature of the
caravan and its rolling stock. Yeah, widening the topic can promote
confusion, but it can also lead to interesting insights, and threads
tend to wander all over the map in this group. Sometimes the thread
will expand upon the original topic and simultaneously end up in some
far away land, with the same people contributing to both branches.

(And there's a mental picture for you ... a length of sewing thread
that has branches. I suppose one could open up the twisted strands at
various points and divert a strand to twist up with a new one. Hmmm,
isn't that how some modelers do the armature for the trees in their
scenery?)

(ObNotedInPassing: I was stuck on "arm", so I called up a thesaurus
and asked about "skeleton". Many useful synonyms, no "arm*". Then I
remembered "ature", and asked the thesaurus about the synonyms of the
now-retrieved word ... many of the same synonyms + "skeleton". Goes to
show ya.)

/dps

[Traddict]

Post by z***@zenofzero.net

There seems to be a British saying, "What you lose on the swings you gain
on the roundabouts." The figurative meaning seems to be something like
"It's a wash," or "it's close to an even tradeoff" or "the law of averages
applies" or "it all evens out in the end."
Does anyone know what the origin and _literal_ meaning of the saying is?
Carnival rides, maybe?

Yes probably. If so, the meaning of the saying may be very matter-of-fact.

Indeed, "What you lose on the swings you gain on the roundabouts" may
actually simply refer to the fact that someone can easily lose something on
a swing (as objects can fall out of their pockets), and gain something on a
roundabout, as some varieties of roundabouts include a "pom-pom" children
must catch to win a free ride. See for instance
www.ladepeche.fr/content/media/image/350/2010/09/11/201009111887.jpg

Post by z***@zenofzero.net

--
Daniel P. B. Smith

Roundabouts and Swings
by
Patrick R Chalmers
It was early last September nigh to Framlin'am-on-Sea,
An' 'twas Fair-day come to-morrow, an' the time was after tea,
An' I met a painted caravan adown a dusty lane,
A Pharaoh with his waggons comin' jolt an' creak an' strain;
A cheery cove an' sunburnt, bold o' eye and wrinkled up,
An' beside him on the splashboard sat a brindled tarrier pup,
An' a lurcher wise as Solomon an' lean as fiddle-strings
Was joggin' in the dust along 'is roundabouts and swings.
"Goo'-day," said 'e; "Goo'-day," said I; "an' 'ow d'you find things go,
An' what's the chance o' millions when you runs a travellin' show?"
"I find," said 'e, "things very much as 'ow I've always found,
For mostly they goes up and down or else goes round and round."
Said 'e, "The job's the very spit o' what it always were,
It's bread and bacon mostly when the dog don't catch a 'are;
But lookin' at it broad, an' while it ain't no merchant king's,
What's lost upon the roundabouts we pulls up on the swings!"
"Goo' luck," said 'e; "Goo' luck," said I; "you've put it past a doubt;
An' keep that lurcher on the road, the gamekeepers is out."
'E thumped upon the footboard an' 'e lumbered on again
To meet a gold-dust sunset down the owl-light in the lane;
An' the moon she climbed the 'azels, while a night-jar seemed to spin
That Pharaoh's wisdom o'er again, 'is sooth of lose-and-win;
For "up an' down an' round," said 'e, "goes all appointed things,
An' losses on the roundabouts means profits on the swings!"