Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 59 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,929 Year: 4,186/9,624 Month: 1,057/974 Week: 16/368 Day: 16/11 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Annoyances
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 62 of 93 (231179)
08-08-2005 8:39 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by nator
08-08-2005 4:17 PM


Of course, in America we pronounce the name "Don Quixote", (DON key HO tee), which is how they say it in Spanish, unlike the English who must anglecize EVERYTHING and pronounce it (DON QUICKS ut).
That's not English (or Brits) its just Spanish ignorant fools. A lot of English are in this boat I guess but I've never heard anyone pronounce in Don Quicks ut.
What amuses me (rather than annoys me) is people who pronounce Byron's Don Juan as if it were the Spanish (Don H-won), as opposed to the correct pronounciation of Don Jew-on.
...and "fillet" is (FILL et), not (fill-AY) after the English get through with it.
We use both, depending on context. Don't ask me what that context is, its just whatever seems right at the time. For examplt Fillet o'fish is almost universally pronounced fill-AY unless one is mocking the northerners.
As to the Aluminium, as far as I am aware Aluminum was the original name for it wasn't it? Oh wait, a website
I'd respond with a post about my pet peeves, but it would take far far far too long. Just for fun though I'll do one, people that rearend somebody and refuse to accept that they were at fault no matter how patiently it is explained to them.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by nator, posted 08-08-2005 4:17 PM nator has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by Omnivorous, posted 08-08-2005 9:52 PM Modulous has replied
 Message 71 by Wounded King, posted 08-09-2005 5:53 AM Modulous has replied
 Message 72 by Silent H, posted 08-09-2005 6:10 AM Modulous has replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 64 of 93 (231200)
08-08-2005 10:38 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by Omnivorous
08-08-2005 9:52 PM


Ah, her insurer declared, the emergency doctrine--we won't even pay for your car.
What the hell is the emergency doctrine?? My God! Any insurer in the UK would pay out for that, and then raise the hell out of the 19 year olds premiums since she is now a huge insurance risk.
OK, I just looked up the emergency doctrine, whilst it has some sense and purpose, it still wouldn't hold water in your situation in the UK. She would still be held liable, no question.
Gargh! I can't believe that shit was pulled on you, *shakes fists*
you see??? You get me started on this, and....GARGH!! It's totally mad, how can anyone claim they aren't liable when....nyeeah
I'm going to bed, everytime I get a glimpse at US financial law it drives me insane. *cue steam pouring out of ears*

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by Omnivorous, posted 08-08-2005 9:52 PM Omnivorous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by MangyTiger, posted 08-08-2005 10:48 PM Modulous has not replied
 Message 66 by Omnivorous, posted 08-09-2005 12:02 AM Modulous has not replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 77 of 93 (231268)
08-09-2005 8:29 AM
Reply to: Message 71 by Wounded King
08-09-2005 5:53 AM


How can you be sure it is Byron's Don Juan they are talking about rather than Tirso de Molina's or Moliere's?
Usually in the same way I'm sure of anything else. Through context or asking. If we are talking about Lord Melbourne, one of our PMs and I make mention that Byron had an affair with his wife, and then someone said "Byron...wasn't he the one that wrote Done H-won", I can be fairly sure they're referring to Byron's work

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by Wounded King, posted 08-09-2005 5:53 AM Wounded King has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 78 by Wounded King, posted 08-09-2005 8:30 AM Modulous has not replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 81 of 93 (231273)
08-09-2005 8:40 AM
Reply to: Message 72 by Silent H
08-09-2005 6:10 AM


Actually there are times when the rearended are in fact at fault, and it is just as ridiculous when they deny their own culpability.
Indeed there are times when a shunt can be the fault of the foremost vehicle, most commonly as you describe when the foremost vehicle has actually pulled into the path of the rear vehicle and there is a marked difference in speed. This is not usually classed a rearend incident though it's generally regarded as a right of way incident or a negligent lane change.
There is another scenario too where liability is not so clear cut in a rearend. That is when the foremost vehicle has stopped more suddenly than the vehicle is physically capable of on its own. For example if the road gave way and the vehicle has smashed into the tarmac (ahem asphalt) making it stop nearly instantly. The rear vehicle may well be travelling a correct distance behind to stop in a situation where the front vehicle does an emergency stop, but not when it stops instantly.
The worst excuse in the world I hear on a daily basis is "The guy in front braked too sharply, it was his fault". Still, I get the dubious pleasure of it being my job to inform them that it's their fault with an air of authority.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by Silent H, posted 08-09-2005 6:10 AM Silent H has not replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 82 of 93 (231275)
08-09-2005 8:48 AM
Reply to: Message 70 by robinrohan
08-09-2005 5:40 AM


Re: Charles
One of my favourite mispronounced is Loughborough. I've heard "Loo Baroo" and "Loga Boroga" (though mostly the latter is done humourosly).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by robinrohan, posted 08-09-2005 5:40 AM robinrohan has not replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 85 of 93 (231283)
08-09-2005 9:26 AM
Reply to: Message 83 by Omnivorous
08-09-2005 8:55 AM


Re: Like, uh, actually
Heh - I do this one. Not the 'like' but the 'actually'. I have a really good reason though. My computer runs really slowly at times, and so I have to, you know, fill the time that the computer takes to find information up by using actual filler words that are largely redundant on average, just a general trend I've noticed, er, but its bettter than the obvious alternative which is to leave an awkward silence on the phone which has the basic problem of needing to be filled lest one caller thinks that the other has actually been sort of....well, disconnected.
You can bet whilst I'm saying it, I'm strangling my monitor.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by Omnivorous, posted 08-09-2005 8:55 AM Omnivorous has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024