[Spellyans] off-topic - Drok yu genef!

Craig Weatherhill weatherhill at freenet.co.uk
Fri Jul 25 19:13:20 IST 2008


I'm mostly away from the computer over the weekend as well - it's the 
annual St Buryan Rally, which lasts over both days and I'll be swaying 
around on the back of a careering pony and trap resplendent in suit and 
bowler hat (thank God I only do this once a year, but I can' possibly 
say no to Huw and Diana Davies, who have been kind enough to let me ride 
their wonderful horses - the alcoholic Irishman Paddy and the giant 
18-hand Shogun in particular - since I had to retire the old girl!).

It's good fun and it's a great show.  Wonderful modelmakers' exhibition, 
in particular, last year.  I hope that's back this year, too.

See you all on Monday.

Craig


A. J. Trim wrote:
> Is that what we have now?
>  
>  
> Regards,
>  
> Andrew J. Trim
>  
>  
>  
>
> *From:* Eddie Climo <mailto:eddie_climo at yahoo.co.uk>
> *Sent:* Friday, July 25, 2008 3:38 PM
> *To:* Standard Cornish discussion list <mailto:spellyans at kernowek.net>
> *Subject:* Re: [Spellyans] off-topic - Drok yu genef!
>
> On 25 Jul 2008, at 14:56, A. J. Trim wrote:
>>
>> . . .. Actually, there is a smidgen of confusion in English. The term 
>> “inflammable” has had to be re-spelt “flammable” for safety reasons!
>>
> To be precise, it was for *alleged* safety reasons. 'Inflammable' was 
> on reagents bottles in Chemistry labs when I was at school, and I 
> don't recall ever hearing of even the dimmest students barbecuing 
> themselves by mis-parsing the word. The opposite then was 
> 'non-inflammable', which is pretty unambiguous as well. 
>
> But what have we moved to now, I wonder? Logically, if we believe the 
> horror stories of those who advocated the change, it should have become:
>> flammable/inflammable.
>
> But according to my recent OED, it's actually:
>> flammable/non-flammable.
>
> Furthermore, the medical profession didn't feel the need to start 
> talking about "flammation of a wound", did they? And have you ever 
> heard reference to a 'flammatory remark'? Hah!
>
> No, it was just the fledgling Health & Safety Industry trying to find 
> solutions to non-existent problems, to give themselves something to do.
>
> 'in lel'? 'yn lel'? 'idn lel'?
>
> :D
>
> Eddie Foirbeis Climo
> - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- - -- -
> Dres ethom akennow byner re bons lyeshes
> /Accenti non multiplicanda praeter necessitatem/
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Spellyans mailing list
> Spellyans at kernowek.net
> http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Spellyans mailing list
> Spellyans at kernowek.net
> http://kernowek.net/mailman/listinfo/spellyans_kernowek.net
>   





More information about the Spellyans mailing list