| Author |
Message |
Ben Zimmer
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 30, 2004 11:22 pm
Post subject: Re: Stool and Faeces as words for manuals |
|
|
don groves wrote:
| Quote: |
In article <1gkx9p6.15lgfqpn0m022N%trio@euronet.nl>,
trio@euronet.nl wrote...
don groves <dgroves@domain.net> wrote:
Bush II may talk about it with him. He used the word several
times in a recent speech about abortion, instead of the more
usual term, fetus.
Sorry, but that's a hoax. Snopes, which runs the Urban Legends Reference
Pages, is a reasonably reliable source on this sort of thing:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/fetal.asp
Yes, I do subscribe to Newsweek and I was taken in by this.
I don't remember seeing any kind of retraction in subsequent
issues either. I'll check their website and if necessary, send
them an email asking them to check their sources and clarify this
for their readership.
|
Are you sure you read it in Newsweek, or just read that it appeared in
Newsweek? Snopes says:
This item is nothing more than a fabrication which plays on
President Bush's reputation for making verbal miscues — no
such report about his speaking at a right-to-life rally and
repeatedly misusing the word 'feces' in place of 'fetus'
appeared in Newsweek, or in any other news publication. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Areff
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 01, 2004 12:31 am
Post subject: Re: Stool and Faeces as words for manuals |
|
|
Richard Chambers wrote:
| Quote: | One thing the British and the US Americans have in common is this unnatural
attitude towards breasts. The highest-selling tabloid newspapers in Britain
are those that display topless photographs on page 3.
[...]
There is something wrong with the psychological state of an entire
nationality (and this applies, unfortunately, to both the British and the
American nationality) which
(a) has an insatiable appetite for topless photographs
and:-
(b) finds it reprehensible or embarassing to show breasts in public, even
for feeding a baby.
Somewhere we have got our values upside-down. We, both British and US
American, are (as a gross generalisation) uptight beyond all reason.
|
I won't deny that in Lamerica there's a continuing taboo wrt public
female breast display, but where's your evidence that Americans have an
"insatiable appetite for topless photographs"? We certainly have no "Page
3"-type tabloids. Bwaha! I'm afraid that's something that only the
BrE have to answer for.
-- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Skitt
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 01, 2004 2:15 am
Post subject: Re: Stool and Faeces as words for manuals |
|
|
don groves wrote with the following attributions:
| Quote: | In article <1gkx9p6.15lgfqpn0m022N%trio@euronet.nl>,
trio@euronet.nl wrote...
don groves <dgroves@domain.net> wrote:
In article <utqml05gnia3mkl936ge6oflhc5kpod4vi@4ax.com>,
chriggs@éircom.net wrote...
|
Don, is there a way you can adjust your newsreader to leave the names or
handles in the attributions? The e-mail addresses do not necessarily reveal
them.
--
Skitt (in Hayward, California)
www.geocities.com/opus731/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
don groves
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 01, 2004 3:58 am
Post subject: Re: Stool and Faeces as words for manuals |
|
|
In article <2s37qpF1gsfebU1@uni-berlin.de>, skitt99@comcast.net
wrote...
| Quote: | don groves wrote with the following attributions:
In article <1gkx9p6.15lgfqpn0m022N%trio@euronet.nl>,
trio@euronet.nl wrote...
don groves <dgroves@domain.net> wrote:
In article <utqml05gnia3mkl936ge6oflhc5kpod4vi@4ax.com>,
chriggs@éircom.net wrote...
Don, is there a way you can adjust your newsreader to leave the names or
handles in the attributions? The e-mail addresses do not necessarily reveal
them.
|
Wiil do, Skitt, thanks for pointing it out.
--
dg (domain=ccwebster) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
don groves
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 01, 2004 4:03 am
Post subject: Re: Stool and Faeces as words for manuals |
|
|
In article <415C40C9.4BE2D235@midway.uchicago.edu>,
bgzimmer@midway.uchicago.edu wrote...
| Quote: | don groves wrote:
In article <1gkx9p6.15lgfqpn0m022N%trio@euronet.nl>,
trio@euronet.nl wrote...
don groves <dgroves@domain.net> wrote:
Bush II may talk about it with him. He used the word several
times in a recent speech about abortion, instead of the more
usual term, fetus.
Sorry, but that's a hoax. Snopes, which runs the Urban Legends Reference
Pages, is a reasonably reliable source on this sort of thing:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/fetal.asp
Yes, I do subscribe to Newsweek and I was taken in by this.
I don't remember seeing any kind of retraction in subsequent
issues either. I'll check their website and if necessary, send
them an email asking them to check their sources and clarify this
for their readership.
Are you sure you read it in Newsweek, or just read that it appeared in
Newsweek? Snopes says:
This item is nothing more than a fabrication which plays on
President Bush's reputation for making verbal miscues ? no
such report about his speaking at a right-to-life rally and
repeatedly misusing the word 'feces' in place of 'fetus'
appeared in Newsweek, or in any other news publication.
|
Good question. I read it somewhere, if not Newsweek then possibly
another magazine, The Nation, or In These Times. I'll do a search
in my old mag pile and on the net.
--
dg (domain=ccwebster) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Charles Riggs
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 01, 2004 2:09 pm
Post subject: Re: Stool and Faeces as words for manuals |
|
|
On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 15:54:26 GMT, "Richard Chambers"
<richard.chambers7@NOSPAMntlworld.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Charles, you seem to be abnormally uptight about breastfeeding. What's the
matter with you? It's a perfectly natural thing to do. My daughter has been
doing it for the past eight months, and it is a heartwarming sight. We do
discuss it with her at the dinner table, with no embarassment whatsoever.
|
I am a firm supporter in the practice of breast feeding. Why, you
know, I was breast fed myself, or so I've been told. I do hope my
mother, and I am sure she did, had the good sense not to practice this
openly in public, just as most of us don't practice those things
normally done in a bathroom in our living rooms.
| Quote: | One thing the British and the US Americans have in common is this unnatural
attitude towards breasts.
|
What's wrong with you? Sex is the most natural human activity in the
world. A healthy attitude towards breasts is to be expected, not
decried.
| Quote: | The highest-selling tabloid newspapers in Britain
are those that display topless photographs on page 3. Yet 28 years ago, when
my wife found a quiet corner in a public park to discreetly feed my Claire
(the same daughter who is now providing the next generation with milk) she
had to endure stares from several members of the public. She was doing it in
the park only because the Ladies toilet was smelly and unhealthy for the
baby.
|
I think she was acting in the most reasonable way possible. Did she
post a description of her experience to her newsgroup though?
| Quote: | There is something wrong with the psychological state of an entire
nationality (and this applies, unfortunately, to both the British and the
American nationality) which
(a) has an insatiable appetite for topless photographs
|
Only when the girl having them is very attractive. Only then will I
dwell on a Page 3 photo.
| Quote: | and:-
(b) finds it reprehensible or embarassing to show breasts in public, even
for feeding a baby.
|
I don't find it either one. But I don't see it as being a dinner table
topic. AUE discussions should be much like dinner table conversation,
I say.
| Quote: | Somewhere we have got our values upside-down. We, both British and US
American, are (as a gross generalisation) uptight beyond all reason.
|
Not about sex, if you were including me.
--
Charles Riggs
Actually, there isn't an accented
letter in my email address |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Simon R. Hughes
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 01, 2004 2:33 pm
Post subject: Re: Stool and Faeces as words for manuals |
|
|
Thus spake Charles Riggs:
| Quote: | Why, you know, I was breast fed myself, or so I've been told.
|
I thought perpetual motion to be a impossibility of physics. You
should donate yourself to science.
--
Simon R. Hughes
See http://home.online.no/~shughes/stuff/email.html for my email
address. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tedfriet
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 01, 2004 3:13 pm
Post subject: Re: Stool and Faeces as words for manuals |
|
|
Mark Barratt wrote:
| Quote: | Tedfriet wrote:
Jim Ward wrote:
In alt.usage.english Zephir Woodwood <zwnospam1965@hotmail.com
wrote:
I'd appreciate your thoughts.
"poppycock" comes from the Dutch for soft crap. They probably have
a word for hard crap, but I don't know it is.
http://www.worldwidewords.org/weirdwords/ww-pop1.htm
Dear Mr Quinion is mistaken is this. 'Poppycock' does indeed comes
from Dutch 'poep' ='crap' soft or not, it's just the universal
colloquial word for 'faeces'.
So 'pappekak' means 'crap crap'?
|
No, it doesn't. In the first place there's no such word as 'pappekak' in
Dutch.'Pap' is 'porridge' in English and doesn'r make any sense here. IMHO
it's a mis-spelling of 'poppekak', 'pop' being Dutch for 'doll' so it means
'doll'scrap'. There's a saying in Dutch 'fijn als gemalen poppekak' which,
litterally translated, means:'as fine as ground doll'scrap'; "fine' is a
kind of pun here, as it can mean the opposite of 'coarse' as well as 'very
religious'.
The latter is meant here.
Cheers
Only after the last tree has been cut down,
Only after the last river has been poisoned,
Only after the last fish has been caught,
Only then will you find out that money cannot be eaten.
Cree Indian prophecy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tedfriet
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 01, 2004 3:29 pm
Post subject: Re: Stool and Faeces as words for manuals |
|
|
Charles Riggs wrote:
| Quote: | On Wed, 29 Sep 2004 23:01:36 GMT, "Zephir Woodwood"
zwnospam1965@hotmail.com> wrote:
In our laboratory we usually refer to "stool" while outside the
laboratory people generally speak of faeces.
I've never understood the difference except when as a young medical
student one professor used to talk about straining to stool.
I prefer having a "stool manual" as opposed to a "faeces manual"
I'd appreciate your thoughts.
The person here who wrote about breast feeding quite recently, another
topic civilized people don't discuss at the dinner table, may be happy
to exchange views with you on the topic of faeces. I doubt you'll find
many other takers.
|
I wonder why Americans have this double standard. They make quite a fuss
about ms Jackson showing one (only one) breast on television, but have no
problems with showing a murder live on it, as happened a few years ago.
Oh boy, how embarrassed much my dear Americans be if they come to Holland
where we are very liberal about that kind of thing. Nudity on TV is no
problem whatsoever, the first topless girl on TV was shown somewhere in the
sixties. It made quite a stir then, but not since then. Prostitution is
legal overhere and almost any woman will be topless on the beach. So because
we are so open about sex, we have very few teenage pregnancies as opposed to
the numers of pregnant teenagers in the US.
The same holds good for regulated abortion. The pro-life people condemn
abortion, but have no compunction in killing the doctor who carries it out.
I have beento the US and I think it's awfully beautiful country, but I just
don't understand their attitude about things which are so common and natural
to us.
--
Cheers
Only after the last tree has been cut down,
Only after the last river has been poisoned,
Only after the last fish has been caught,
Only then will you find out that money cannot be eaten.
Cree Indian prophecy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bloke
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 01, 2004 5:14 pm
Post subject: Re: Stool and Faeces as words for manuals |
|
|
On Fri, 1 Oct 2004 14:50:24 +0200, trio@euronet.nl (Donna Richoux)
wrote:
| Quote: | Tedfriet <friet@quicknet.nl> wrote:
Mark Barratt wrote:
So 'pappekak' means 'crap crap'?
No, it doesn't. In the first place there's no such word as 'pappekak' in
Dutch.'Pap' is 'porridge' in English and doesn'r make any sense here. IMHO
it's a mis-spelling of 'poppekak', 'pop' being Dutch for 'doll' so it means
'doll'scrap'. There's a saying in Dutch 'fijn als gemalen poppekak' which,
litterally translated, means:'as fine as ground doll'scrap'; "fine' is a
kind of pun here, as it can mean the opposite of 'coarse' as well as 'very
religious'.
The latter is meant here.
Ted, did you get any of this from an actual Dutch etymological
dictionary (I hope you own one, I've never sprung for the cost), or did
you just make it up? I see that "IMHO" stuck in there.
I've seen more than one Dutch adult make a horrible face at the thought
of eating porridge/oatmeal/hot cereal ("That's for babies! Peasants!")
Even in English, to call something "pap" is to degrade it, to call it
worthless nonsense. From Merriam-Webster:
Main Entry: 2 pap
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English
Date: 15th century
1 : a soft food for infants or invalids
2 : political patronage
3 : something lacking solid value or substance
No help on etymology there, but there is here (and I had remembered
enough about this to lead me to doubt you):
Main Entry: pop·py·cock
Function: noun
Etymology: Dutch dialect pappekak, literally, soft
dung, from Dutch pap pap + kak dung
Date: 1865
: empty talk or writing : NONSENSE
So, please note: "pappekak" was a Dutch word, although in dialect.
Literally, soft dung.
(Dung and food connections: Cow pies. Cow patties. Buffalo chips.)
|
There is definitely a breast connotation with pap, as in the Paps of
Jura (look it up on Google - some nice pictures aswell).
Bloke |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MC
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 01, 2004 6:07 pm
Post subject: Re: Stool and Faeces as words for manuals |
|
|
In article <b8a3e$415d2389$d47fd446$20046@news.multikabel.nl>,
"Tedfriet" <friet@quicknet.nl> wrote:
| Quote: | Charles Riggs wrote:
On Wed, 29 Sep 2004 23:01:36 GMT, "Zephir Woodwood"
zwnospam1965@hotmail.com> wrote:
In our laboratory we usually refer to "stool" while outside the
laboratory people generally speak of faeces.
I've never understood the difference except when as a young medical
student one professor used to talk about straining to stool.
I prefer having a "stool manual" as opposed to a "faeces manual"
I'd appreciate your thoughts.
The person here who wrote about breast feeding quite recently, another
topic civilized people don't discuss at the dinner table, may be happy
to exchange views with you on the topic of faeces. I doubt you'll find
many other takers.
I wonder why Americans have this double standard. They make quite a fuss
about ms Jackson showing one (only one) breast on television, but have no
problems with showing a murder live on it, as happened a few years ago.
Oh boy, how embarrassed much my dear Americans be if they come to Holland
where we are very liberal about that kind of thing. Nudity on TV is no
problem whatsoever, the first topless girl on TV was shown somewhere in the
sixties. It made quite a stir then, but not since then. Prostitution is
legal overhere and almost any woman will be topless on the beach. So because
we are so open about sex, we have very few teenage pregnancies as opposed to
the numers of pregnant teenagers in the US.
The same holds good for regulated abortion. The pro-life people condemn
abortion, but have no compunction in killing the doctor who carries it out.
I have beento the US and I think it's awfully beautiful country, but I just
don't understand their attitude about things which are so common and natural
to us.
|
Generalise much?
--
That reminds me of a story that¹s so dirty
I¹m ashamed to think of it myself.
--S.J. Perelman
KILL TROLLS: http://www.schmuckwithanunderwood.com/trolls.htm |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tedfriet
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 01, 2004 6:33 pm
Post subject: Re: Stool and Faeces as words for manuals |
|
|
MC wrote:
| Quote: | In article <b8a3e$415d2389$d47fd446$20046@news.multikabel.nl>,
"Tedfriet" <friet@quicknet.nl> wrote:
Charles Riggs wrote:
On Wed, 29 Sep 2004 23:01:36 GMT, "Zephir Woodwood"
zwnospam1965@hotmail.com> wrote:
I wonder why Americans have this double standard. They make quite a
fuss about ms Jackson showing one (only one) breast on television,
but have no problems with showing a murder live on it, as happened a
few years ago.
Oh boy, how embarrassed much my dear Americans be if they come to
Holland where we are very liberal about that kind of thing. Nudity
on TV is no problem whatsoever, the first topless girl on TV was
shown somewhere in the sixties. It made quite a stir then, but not
since then. Prostitution is legal overhere and almost any woman will
be topless on the beach. So because we are so open about sex, we
have very few teenage pregnancies as opposed to the numers of
pregnant teenagers in the US.
The same holds good for regulated abortion. The pro-life people
condemn abortion, but have no compunction in killing the doctor who
carries it out. I have beento the US and I think it's awfully
beautiful country, but I just don't understand their attitude about
things which are so common and natural to us.
Generalise much?
|
Wel, not really no, but nevertheless maybe I'd better rephrase is to; "I
wonder why so many Americans.."
It's a fact that the performance by ms Jackson would never even have caused
a ripple here in Holland and broadcast company wouldn't have been fined for
$ 450.000,-
--
Cheers
Only after the last tree has been cut down,
Only after the last river has been poisoned,
Only after the last fish has been caught,
Only then will you find out that money cannot be eaten.
Cree Indian prophecy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Donna Richoux
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 01, 2004 6:50 pm
Post subject: Re: Stool and Faeces as words for manuals |
|
|
Tedfriet <friet@quicknet.nl> wrote:
| Quote: | Mark Barratt wrote:
So 'pappekak' means 'crap crap'?
No, it doesn't. In the first place there's no such word as 'pappekak' in
Dutch.'Pap' is 'porridge' in English and doesn'r make any sense here. IMHO
it's a mis-spelling of 'poppekak', 'pop' being Dutch for 'doll' so it means
'doll'scrap'. There's a saying in Dutch 'fijn als gemalen poppekak' which,
litterally translated, means:'as fine as ground doll'scrap'; "fine' is a
kind of pun here, as it can mean the opposite of 'coarse' as well as 'very
religious'.
The latter is meant here.
|
Ted, did you get any of this from an actual Dutch etymological
dictionary (I hope you own one, I've never sprung for the cost), or did
you just make it up? I see that "IMHO" stuck in there.
I've seen more than one Dutch adult make a horrible face at the thought
of eating porridge/oatmeal/hot cereal ("That's for babies! Peasants!")
Even in English, to call something "pap" is to degrade it, to call it
worthless nonsense. From Merriam-Webster:
Main Entry: 2 pap
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English
Date: 15th century
1 : a soft food for infants or invalids
2 : political patronage
3 : something lacking solid value or substance
No help on etymology there, but there is here (and I had remembered
enough about this to lead me to doubt you):
Main Entry: pop·py·cock
Function: noun
Etymology: Dutch dialect pappekak, literally, soft
dung, from Dutch pap pap + kak dung
Date: 1865
: empty talk or writing : NONSENSE
So, please note: "pappekak" was a Dutch word, although in dialect.
Literally, soft dung.
(Dung and food connections: Cow pies. Cow patties. Buffalo chips.)
--
Best -- Donna Richoux |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Areff
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 01, 2004 6:53 pm
Post subject: Re: Stool and Faeces as words for manuals |
|
|
Tedfriet wrote:
[describing the Netherlands]:
| Quote: | Prostitution is
legal overhere and almost any woman will be topless on the beach.
|
Not to downplay the importance of your various arguments, but are there
actual "beaches" in the Netherlands as we Lamericans understand the term?
Dauna Richoux might want to answer this one, though she's from Northern
California so she doesn't really know from beaches either.
-- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mark Barratt
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 01, 2004 6:55 pm
Post subject: Re: Stool and Faeces as words for manuals |
|
|
Tedfriet wrote:
| Quote: | Mark Barratt wrote:
So 'pappekak' means 'crap crap'?
No, it doesn't. In the first place there's no such word as 'pappekak' in
Dutch.'Pap' is 'porridge' in English and doesn'r make any sense here. IMHO
it's a mis-spelling of 'poppekak', 'pop' being Dutch for 'doll' so it means
'doll'scrap'. There's a saying in Dutch 'fijn als gemalen poppekak' which,
litterally translated, means:'as fine as ground doll'scrap'; "fine' is a
kind of pun here, as it can mean the opposite of 'coarse' as well as 'very
religious'.
The latter is meant here.
|
Perhaps you should let these people know:
<http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=poppycock>
They say that 'poppycock' is "probably" from 19th century Dutch
dialect 'pappekak'. I'm not saying that you're wrong, but somebody
clearly is. And if they're right, then it does indeed mean 'crap
crap'!
Incidentally, I just looked at 9 other on-line dictionaries. All of
those that give an etymology agree with etymononline.
--
Regards,
Mark Barratt |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in