| Author |
Message |
Django Cat
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 24, 2004 12:04 pm
Post subject: Re: is this sentence correct? |
|
|
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 22:24:38 -0500, "Maria Conlon"
<mariaconlon001@hotmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Tony Cooper wrote:
I gave you a suggestion: Indulging your fantasies is not a crime.
Or, milder, Living your fantasies is not a crime. Or even Fantasy
indulgence is not a crime.
I think I'd avoid the word "indulge." (But I think the OP has already
got his solution.)
|
With all respect to Krejzz and the effort put into finding solutions
here, I suspect the hairdressers in question are just looking for a
cool English slogan to put on the window and impress their
polish-speaking customers with the cosmpolitan nature of the business
- you know, right above where it says 'London, Paris, New York'. What
it actually means may not matter.
DC
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Robin Bignall
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 24, 2004 6:05 pm
Post subject: Re: is this sentence correct? |
|
|
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 02:31:44 GMT, Tony Cooper
<tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote:
| Quote: | On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 20:31:33 -0000, "Mike Lyle"
mike_lyle_uk@REMOVETHISyahoo.co.uk> wrote:
Harvey Van Sickle wrote:
On 23 Nov 2004, Areff wrote
Tony Cooper wrote:
Can you use this? Of course. Should you use it? I wouldn't in
an ad viewed in the US. "Abusing" has a negative connotation in
the US. It's associated with harming children and women: child
abuse and spouse abuse. (Spouse is either male or female, but
the first association is female)
You mean the first association for "spouse", in general, is
female? I'm not sure I agree. I do agree that "spouse abuse"
makes one first think of abuse of wives by husbands.
I took that to be Tony's meaning.
Interesting: if I see "spouse" in that sort of context, my first
thought is that the writer's chosen it to avoid saying "wife", so she
probably means to draw my attention to the fact that husbands are
included.
It not a writer's thing. "Spousal abuse" is a term used in both law
and psychology. It does include husbands, but the first thought is
off a wife being abused. Legally, we want to include both, but the
mind doesn't work that way.
This is a hot topic in the UK. While I was showering this morning I |
caught parts of a BBC Radio 4 "Woman's Hour" programme which goes into
those Crime Survey statistics I mentioned. It can be heard at
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/womanshour/2004_47_wed_01.shtml
"Domestic Violence - still a gender issue?
The most recent British Crime Survey shows that one in four women and
one in six men have suffered domestic violence at some point in their
lives.
As part of Domestic Violence Awareness Week, Woman's Hour looks at the
statistics and asks how helpful it is to think about domestic violence
as either a male or female problem."
--
wrmst rgrds
Robin Bignall
Hertfordshire
England |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike Lyle
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 24, 2004 6:05 pm
Post subject: Re: is this sentence correct? |
|
|
Django Cat wrote:
| Quote: | On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 21:21:13 -0000, "Mike Lyle"
mike_lyle_uk@REMOVETHISyahoo.co.uk> wrote:
[...]
I ferreted, and found it: rather nice, DC. (He said "Live the
fantasy: it's not a crime.")
Your concern about columbophiles is quite admirable.
Well, I do worry. Is there a Ferret Fancy BTW?
|
Siwr o fod.
Meic.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tony Cooper
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 24, 2004 6:05 pm
Post subject: Re: is this sentence correct? |
|
|
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 22:24:38 -0500, "Maria Conlon"
<mariaconlon001@hotmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Tony Cooper wrote:
I gave you a suggestion: Indulging your fantasies is not a crime.
Or, milder, Living your fantasies is not a crime. Or even Fantasy
indulgence is not a crime.
I think I'd avoid the word "indulge." (But I think the OP has already
got his solution.)
American Heritage:
TRANSITIVE VERB:1. To yield to the desires and whims of, especially to
an excessive degree; humor. 2a. To yield to; gratify: indulge a craving
for chocolate. b. To allow (oneself) unrestrained gratification:
indulged herself with idle daydreams. See synonyms at pamper. 3. Roman
Catholic Church To grant an ecclesiastical indulgence or dispensation
to.
INTRANSITIVE VERB:1. To indulge oneself: eyed the desserts but didn't
indulge. 2. To engage or take part, especially freely or avidly:
indulged in outrageous behavior; indulged in all the latest fads.
|
I don't understand why you suggest avoiding "indulge". It seems to
express what the OP wants to express: that there's nothing wrong with
yielding to desires even if the desires are daydreams.
The only question I would have about the word is the market itself.
This seems to be an ad written in English for the Polish market. I'd
wonder if "indulge" translates to the reader with the same definition
as your transitive verb: 1 and 2. If the common use is 3, then it's
not a good word to use.
Do you not see that the person the ad is trying to attract is one that
would yield to a held-back desire? If you are not the type to
regularly do so, but always had a suppressed desire to do so, would
you not consider having a pedicure or a mud bath an indulgence? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tony Cooper
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 24, 2004 6:06 pm
Post subject: Re: is this sentence correct? |
|
|
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 13:44:06 +0000, Robin Bignall
<docrobin@ntlworld.com> wrote:
| Quote: | On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 02:31:44 GMT, Tony Cooper
tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote:
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 20:31:33 -0000, "Mike Lyle"
mike_lyle_uk@REMOVETHISyahoo.co.uk> wrote:
Harvey Van Sickle wrote:
On 23 Nov 2004, Areff wrote
Tony Cooper wrote:
Can you use this? Of course. Should you use it? I wouldn't in
an ad viewed in the US. "Abusing" has a negative connotation in
the US. It's associated with harming children and women: child
abuse and spouse abuse. (Spouse is either male or female, but
the first association is female)
You mean the first association for "spouse", in general, is
female? I'm not sure I agree. I do agree that "spouse abuse"
makes one first think of abuse of wives by husbands.
I took that to be Tony's meaning.
Interesting: if I see "spouse" in that sort of context, my first
thought is that the writer's chosen it to avoid saying "wife", so she
probably means to draw my attention to the fact that husbands are
included.
It not a writer's thing. "Spousal abuse" is a term used in both law
and psychology. It does include husbands, but the first thought is
off a wife being abused. Legally, we want to include both, but the
mind doesn't work that way.
This is a hot topic in the UK. While I was showering this morning I
caught parts of a BBC Radio 4 "Woman's Hour" programme which goes into
those Crime Survey statistics I mentioned. It can be heard at
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/womanshour/2004_47_wed_01.shtml
"Domestic Violence - still a gender issue?
|
Is "domestic violence" considered to be synonymous with "spousal
abuse"? I think of domestic violence as being physical attacks by one
or both parties. Spousal abuse includes both physical attacks and
non-physical abuse.
This came up in a conversation just last night. My wife has a female
client who is being subjected to mental abuse. Her live-in boyfriend
constantly denigrates her in a loudly abusive manner. So far, he has
not struck her. However, this is part of the pattern of incipient
physical abuse. The abuser convinces the abused that she is stupid
and deserving of punishment. At the same time, he is convincing
himself that she deserves punishment.
My wife is trying to get the client into a counseling program before
the physical abuse starts. She is hampered in this because she cannot
suggest that abuse is taking place or will take place. She has to
talk around the subject and draw out the client to ask for
suggestions.
(I've mentioned this before, but my wife is a RN case manager in a
program that works with mothers-to-be and recent mothers.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Krejzz
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 24, 2004 6:08 pm
Post subject: Re: is this sentence correct? |
|
|
| Quote: | With all respect to Krejzz and the effort put into finding solutions
here, I suspect the hairdressers in question are just looking for a
cool English slogan to put on the window and impress their
polish-speaking customers with the cosmpolitan nature of the business
- you know, right above where it says 'London, Paris, New York'. What
it actually means may not matter.
DC
|
No, no. This ad is on the back cover of their magazine. It's distributed
abroad too. That's why I worry about the meaning of the sentence.
Thanks again.
--
Krejzz |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Graeme Thomas
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 24, 2004 6:08 pm
Post subject: Re: is this sentence correct? |
|
|
In article <qd49q09814t5skhqgbc0bfdc6rspsl6idi@4ax.com>, Tony Cooper
<tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> writes
| Quote: | (I've mentioned this before, but my wife is a RN case manager in a
program that works with mothers-to-be and recent mothers.)
|
It may be due to my failing memory, but I would have thought that the
fact that your wife works for the Royal Navy would have been
sufficiently memorable for me not to have forgotten it.
--
Graeme Thomas |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Charles Riggs
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 24, 2004 6:11 pm
Post subject: Re: is this sentence correct? |
|
|
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 13:26:34 GMT, Tony Cooper
<tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote:
| Quote: | On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 11:59:51 +0100, Krejzz <ohlo@_WYTNIJ_op.pl> wrote:
hello, first time here :)
"Fancy abusing is not a crime" - is this sentence correct?
Thanks for any suggestions.
It could be if you made it "Fancy-abusing" to indicate that what is
being abused is your fancy. Your "fancy" is something that you admire
or like. If you take a fancy to a girl, you like her.
|
If expressed that way, it is more likely you simply want to fuck her.
Liking might come later, or it might have existed before, or you might
like her at first then later not like her, or you might not get to
have your way with her at all -- there are a number of possibilities.
From the COD:
fancy
v. (fancies, fancied)
1 Brit. informal: feel a desire for. => find sexually attractive.
--
Charles Riggs
They are no accented letters in my email address |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Charles Riggs
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 24, 2004 6:11 pm
Post subject: Re: is this sentence correct? |
|
|
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 14:05:29 GMT, Tony Cooper
<tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote:
| Quote: | Is "domestic violence" considered to be synonymous with "spousal
abuse"? I think of domestic violence as being physical attacks by one
or both parties.
|
As well as violence by or against the children or by anyone else
living in or visiting the house on anyone in the house or being, at
the time, on property belonging to the house. (You okay on that, Bob
L?)
| Quote: | Spousal abuse includes both physical attacks and
non-physical abuse.
|
Certainly.
One of the sad things, among many, about the problem is how often it
goes unreported and how often, when it is, little is done about it.
--
Charles Riggs
They are no accented letters in my email address |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tony Cooper
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 24, 2004 6:12 pm
Post subject: Re: is this sentence correct? |
|
|
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 15:06:22 +0000, Graeme Thomas
<graeme@graemet.demon.co.uk> wrote:
| Quote: | In article <qd49q09814t5skhqgbc0bfdc6rspsl6idi@4ax.com>, Tony Cooper
tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> writes
(I've mentioned this before, but my wife is a RN case manager in a
program that works with mothers-to-be and recent mothers.)
It may be due to my failing memory, but I would have thought that the
fact that your wife works for the Royal Navy would have been
sufficiently memorable for me not to have forgotten it.
|
That my wife is in the Royal Navy is a rank assumption. I will have
to give you a rating of a petty thinker.
In the US, RN indicates the status of "Registered Nurse". Actually,
she is entitled to write BSN after her name: Bachelor of Science,
Nursing.
There, she might be a Sister, but she is not my Sis. She is not at
all Matronly. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Django Cat
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 25, 2004 12:05 am
Post subject: Re: is this sentence correct? |
|
|
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 13:45:16 -0000, "Mike Lyle"
<mike_lyle_uk@REMOVETHISyahoo.co.uk> wrote:
| Quote: | Django Cat wrote:
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 21:21:13 -0000, "Mike Lyle"
mike_lyle_uk@REMOVETHISyahoo.co.uk> wrote:
[...]
I ferreted, and found it: rather nice, DC. (He said "Live the
fantasy: it's not a crime.")
Your concern about columbophiles is quite admirable.
Well, I do worry. Is there a Ferret Fancy BTW?
Siwr o fod.
Meic.
|
Y clwb ferret, siwr o fod. Years ago I went to watch Oldham with my
Brother and Nephew. They both had season tickets, but I had to go in
with the away fans. Millwall.
In fact they turned out to be a nice bunch of guys, with the best line
in terrace chants I've ever heard. As the Oldham fans were leaving
(we were all penned behind enormous police horses) they started
singing, to the tune of Guantanamara:-
"Home to your ferrets, you're going home to your ferrets...."
DC |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Django Cat
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 25, 2004 12:05 am
Post subject: Re: is this sentence correct? |
|
|
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 16:08:02 +0100, Krejzz <ohlo@_WYTNIJ_op.pl> wrote:
| Quote: | With all respect to Krejzz and the effort put into finding solutions
here, I suspect the hairdressers in question are just looking for a
cool English slogan to put on the window and impress their
polish-speaking customers with the cosmpolitan nature of the business
- you know, right above where it says 'London, Paris, New York'. What
it actually means may not matter.
DC
No, no. This ad is on the back cover of their magazine. It's distributed
abroad too. That's why I worry about the meaning of the sentence.
Thanks again.
|
Fair enough. Sorry to jump to conclusions.
DC |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Django Cat
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 25, 2004 12:05 am
Post subject: Re: is this sentence correct? |
|
|
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 13:44:06 +0000, Robin Bignall
<docrobin@ntlworld.com> wrote:
| Quote: | On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 02:31:44 GMT, Tony Cooper
tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote:
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 20:31:33 -0000, "Mike Lyle"
mike_lyle_uk@REMOVETHISyahoo.co.uk> wrote:
Harvey Van Sickle wrote:
On 23 Nov 2004, Areff wrote
Tony Cooper wrote:
Can you use this? Of course. Should you use it? I wouldn't in
an ad viewed in the US. "Abusing" has a negative connotation in
the US. It's associated with harming children and women: child
abuse and spouse abuse. (Spouse is either male or female, but
the first association is female)
You mean the first association for "spouse", in general, is
female? I'm not sure I agree. I do agree that "spouse abuse"
makes one first think of abuse of wives by husbands.
I took that to be Tony's meaning.
Interesting: if I see "spouse" in that sort of context, my first
thought is that the writer's chosen it to avoid saying "wife", so she
probably means to draw my attention to the fact that husbands are
included.
It not a writer's thing. "Spousal abuse" is a term used in both law
and psychology. It does include husbands, but the first thought is
off a wife being abused. Legally, we want to include both, but the
mind doesn't work that way.
This is a hot topic in the UK. While I was showering this morning I
caught parts of a BBC Radio 4 "Woman's Hour" programme which goes into
those Crime Survey statistics I mentioned. It can be heard at
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/womanshour/2004_47_wed_01.shtml
"Domestic Violence - still a gender issue?
The most recent British Crime Survey shows that one in four women and
one in six men have suffered domestic violence at some point in their
lives.
As part of Domestic Violence Awareness Week, Woman's Hour looks at the
statistics and asks how helpful it is to think about domestic violence
as either a male or female problem."
|
I caught that, and the way one of the interviewees wrote off the
other's evidence, and basically claimed it was rubbish and imagination
was completely sickening. I'm sure the great majority of domestic
violence *is* men abusing women, but that doesn't mean it never
happens the other way. I particularly enjoyed the bit where she
claimed that in 'this day and age' men wouldn't be inhibited about
reporting violent partners; "guess what lads...?"
DC |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
the Omrud
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 25, 2004 12:06 am
Post subject: Re: is this sentence correct? |
|
|
Django Cat typed thus:
| Quote: | On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 13:44:06 +0000, Robin Bignall
docrobin@ntlworld.com> wrote:
The most recent British Crime Survey shows that one in four women and
one in six men have suffered domestic violence at some point in their
lives.
As part of Domestic Violence Awareness Week, Woman's Hour looks at the
statistics and asks how helpful it is to think about domestic violence
as either a male or female problem."
I caught that, and the way one of the interviewees wrote off the
other's evidence, and basically claimed it was rubbish and imagination
was completely sickening. I'm sure the great majority of domestic
violence *is* men abusing women, but that doesn't mean it never
happens the other way. I particularly enjoyed the bit where she
claimed that in 'this day and age' men wouldn't be inhibited about
reporting violent partners; "guess what lads...?"
|
A man was on the sadly Peel-less Home Truths last week talking about
how he had been systematically beaten and injured by his partner over
a number of years. He eventually phoned a men's helpline, who
unfortunately called him back when she was in - she broke both his
legs.
Any slight republicanism within me died with John Peel, as he was my
only possible candidate for President. Of course, he wouldn't have
accepted the position, but that's exactly what you want in a
president.
--
David
=====
replace the first component of address
with the definite article. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike Lyle
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 25, 2004 12:08 am
Post subject: Re: is this sentence correct? |
|
|
Django Cat wrote:
| Quote: | On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 13:44:06 +0000, Robin Bignall
docrobin@ntlworld.com> wrote:
[...]
The most recent British Crime Survey shows that one in four women
and
one in six men have suffered domestic violence at some point in
their
lives.
As part of Domestic Violence Awareness Week, Woman's Hour looks at
the statistics and asks how helpful it is to think about domestic
violence as either a male or female problem."
I caught that, and the way one of the interviewees wrote off the
other's evidence, and basically claimed it was rubbish and
imagination
was completely sickening. I'm sure the great majority of domestic
violence *is* men abusing women, but that doesn't mean it never
happens the other way. I particularly enjoyed the bit where she
claimed that in 'this day and age' men wouldn't be inhibited about
reporting violent partners; "guess what lads...?"
|
Yes, I caught some of it, too, and was shocked. It reminded me of the
not-distant days when people refused to believe how much violence
there was against women. I couldn't understand why it had to be a
matter for dispute.
Mike. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in