| Author |
Message |
highstep
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 28, 2005 9:53 pm
Post subject: Re: "apartments" in England and the Vatican |
|
|
On Sat, 23 Apr 2005 02:59:55 GMT, Tony Cooper
<tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote:
| Quote: | On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 22:49:23 GMT, rbaniste1@shaw.ca wrote:
What's that got to do with it? The point of usage being discussed is
the reluctance of ProperE to drop the preposition in a sentence like
"he wrote to his mother". Some Americans and other colonials will
sacrifice clarity by giving the preposition the chop, but I believe
only those inhabitants (voters that is) of the UK who take their
models from the BBC and other corrupters of the language will follow
suit.
I wonder if the son of a British ProperE father and a colonial mother
that sacrifices clarity would say "I'm going to hospital and while I'm
there I'll write to mother." or "I'm going to the hospital and while
I'm there I'll write mother."
Which is the corrupted version?
|
Mother all over the walls, presumably?
--
Highstep
Time, Gentlemen, please! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
highstep
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 28, 2005 9:55 pm
Post subject: Re: "apartments" in England and the Vatican |
|
|
On Sat, 23 Apr 2005 14:22:33 GMT, Tony Cooper
<tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote:
| Quote: | On Sat, 23 Apr 2005 08:48:51 GMT, the Omrud <usenet.omrud@gmail.com
wrote:
Tony Cooper put finger to keyboard in this fashion:
On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 22:49:23 GMT, rbaniste1@shaw.ca wrote:
What's that got to do with it? The point of usage being discussed is
the reluctance of ProperE to drop the preposition in a sentence like
"he wrote to his mother". Some Americans and other colonials will
sacrifice clarity by giving the preposition the chop, but I believe
only those inhabitants (voters that is) of the UK who take their
models from the BBC and other corrupters of the language will follow
suit.
I wonder if the son of a British ProperE father and a colonial mother
that sacrifices clarity would say "I'm going to hospital and while I'm
there I'll write to mother." or "I'm going to the hospital and while
I'm there I'll write mother."
Which is the corrupted version?
Dodging the question, I can tell you that both the hospital phrases
are native to UK English and are unexceptional, but they have
different meanings. However the phase "I'll write mother" can only
mean: "I'll write 'mother'".
The pondial difference is certainly recognized and accepted, but "I'm
going to write mother" is native to US English and unexceptional. It
may not be native and unexceptional to *all* US speakers, but it is
certainly common enough. So why is it remarkable here?
To those who don't think it's common, think of phrases like: "If you
don't like it, write your Congressman." or "I'm going to write the
manufacturer and complain." Most of us here use the construction,
but we just don't think about it. I think it's one of those things
that jump out at the reader on-screen, but passes unnoticed in other
situations.
|
I'd prefer not to think of phrases like that if you could bear with me,
old chap.
| Quote: | When we read a book, a magazine, a newspaper, or a letter from Sis
(our real Sis, that is), we don't notice this type of thing We only
notice the egregious errors. We scrutinize the postings here, though.
|
--
Highstep
Time, Gentlemen, please! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 29, 2005 12:06 am
Post subject: Re: "apartments" in England and the Vatican |
|
|
On Thu, 28 Apr 2005 17:53:34 +0200, highstep <high@step.fr> wrote:
| Quote: | On Sat, 23 Apr 2005 02:59:55 GMT, Tony Cooper
tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote:
On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 22:49:23 GMT, rbaniste1@shaw.ca wrote:
What's that got to do with it? The point of usage being discussed is
the reluctance of ProperE to drop the preposition in a sentence like
"he wrote to his mother". Some Americans and other colonials will
sacrifice clarity by giving the preposition the chop, but I believe
only those inhabitants (voters that is) of the UK who take their
models from the BBC and other corrupters of the language will follow
suit.
I wonder if the son of a British ProperE father and a colonial mother
that sacrifices clarity would say "I'm going to hospital and while I'm
there I'll write to mother." or "I'm going to the hospital and while
I'm there I'll write mother."
Which is the corrupted version?
Mother all over the walls, presumably?
|
I think one ought to preserve the nightmare of idiom and assume that
the walls are rubber. I am happy to see your conception of clarity
squares with mine. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Skitt
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 29, 2005 1:04 am
Post subject: Re: "apartments" in England and the Vatican |
|
|
Murray Arnow wrote:
| Quote: | Skitt wrote:
I see. I have never come across one. I have very limited
experience in anything other than owning houses, and when I studied
real estate cooperative apartments didn't exist. That was long ago.
How far back did you study? Co-operative apartments have been around
in Chicago for over 50 years, although they are now being rapidly
replaced by condominiums. A co-op is an apartment building owned
equally by its tenants and share a common mortgage. The usage of
co-operative apartments may have changed over time, however.
|
I studied California real estate law back in the early 'seventies.
--
Skitt (in Hayward, California)
www.geocities.com/opus731/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Skitt
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 29, 2005 1:30 am
Post subject: Re: "apartments" in England and the Vatican |
|
|
I, Skitt, wrote:
| Quote: | Murray Arnow wrote:
Skitt wrote:
I see. I have never come across one. I have very limited
experience in anything other than owning houses, and when I studied
real estate cooperative apartments didn't exist. That was long ago.
How far back did you study? Co-operative apartments have been around
in Chicago for over 50 years, although they are now being rapidly
replaced by condominiums. A co-op is an apartment building owned
equally by its tenants and share a common mortgage. The usage of
co-operative apartments may have changed over time, however.
I studied California real estate law back in the early 'seventies.
|
I will add the following:
The current California definitions are listed below. Santa Monica defined
the term "cooperative apartment" (for that city's purposes) in 1989. I am
not aware of any entities by that name in my neck of the woods.
===================
California Civil Code:
1351. As used in this title, the following terms have the following
meanings:
(a) "Association" means a nonprofit corporation or unincorporated
association created for the purpose of managing a common interest
development.
(b) "Common area" means the entire common interest development
except the separate interests therein. The estate in the common area
may be a fee, a life estate, an estate for years, or any combination
of the foregoing. However, the common area for a planned
development specified in paragraph (2) of subdivision (k) may consist
of mutual or reciprocal easement rights appurtenant to the separate
interests.
(c) "Common interest development" means any of the following:
(1) A community apartment project.
(2) A condominium project.
(3) A planned development.
(4) A stock cooperative.
(d) "Community apartment project" means a development in which an
undivided interest in land is coupled with the right of exclusive
occupancy of any apartment located thereon.
(e) "Condominium plan" means a plan consisting of (1) a
description or survey map of a condominium project, which shall refer
to or show monumentation on the ground, (2) a three-dimensional
description of a condominium project, one or more dimensions of which
may extend for an indefinite distance upwards or downwards, in
sufficient detail to identify the common areas and each separate
interest, and (3) a certificate consenting to the recordation of the
condominium plan pursuant to this title signed and acknowledged by
the following:
(A) The record owner of fee title to that property included in the
condominium project.
(B) In the case of a condominium project which will terminate upon
the termination of an estate for years, the certificate shall be
signed and acknowledged by all lessors and lessees of the estate for
years.
(C) In the case of a condominium project subject to a life estate,
the certificate shall be signed and acknowledged by all life tenants
and remainder interests.
(D) The certificate shall also be signed and acknowledged by
either the trustee or the beneficiary of each recorded deed of trust,
and the mortgagee of each recorded mortgage encumbering the
property.
Owners of mineral rights, easements, rights-of-way, and other
nonpossessory interests do not need to sign the condominium plan.
Further, in the event a conversion to condominiums of a community
apartment project or stock cooperative has been approved by the
required number of owners, trustees, beneficiaries, and mortgagees
pursuant to Section 66452.10 of the Government Code, the certificate
need only be signed by those owners, trustees, beneficiaries, and
mortgagees approving the conversion.
A condominium plan may be amended or revoked by a subsequently
acknowledged recorded instrument executed by all the persons whose
signatures would be required pursuant to this subdivision.
(f) A "condominium project" means a development consisting of
condominiums. A condominium consists of an undivided interest in
common in a portion of real property coupled with a separate interest
in space called a unit, the boundaries of which are described on a
recorded final map, parcel map, or condominium plan in sufficient
detail to locate all boundaries thereof. The area within these
boundaries may be filled with air, earth, or water, or any
combination thereof, and need not be physically attached to land
except by easements for access and, if necessary, support. The
description of the unit may refer to (1) boundaries described in the
recorded final map, parcel map, or condominium plan, (2) physical
boundaries, either in existence, or to be constructed, such as walls,
floors, and ceilings of a structure or any portion thereof, (3) an
entire structure containing one or more units, or (4) any combination
thereof. The portion or portions of the real property held in
undivided interest may be all of the real property, except for the
separate interests, or may include a particular three-dimensional
portion thereof, the boundaries of which are described on a recorded
final map, parcel map, or condominium plan. The area within these
boundaries may be filled with air, earth, or water, or any
combination thereof, and need not be physically attached to land
except by easements for access and, if necessary, support. An
individual condominium within a condominium project may include, in
addition, a separate interest in other portions of the real property.
(g) "Declarant" means the person or group of persons designated in
the declaration as declarant, or if no declarant is designated, the
person or group of persons who sign the original declaration or who
succeed to special rights, preferences, or privileges designated in
the declaration as belonging to the signator of the original
declaration.
(h) "Declaration" means the document, however denominated, which
contains the information required by Section 1353.
(i) "Exclusive use common area" means a portion of the common
areas designated by the declaration for the exclusive use of one or
more, but fewer than all, of the owners of the separate interests and
which is or will be appurtenant to the separate interest or
interests.
(1) Unless the declaration otherwise provides, any shutters,
awnings, window boxes, doorsteps, stoops, porches, balconies, patios,
exterior doors, doorframes, and hardware incident thereto, screens
and windows or other fixtures designed to serve a single separate
interest, but located outside the boundaries of the separate
interest, are exclusive use common areas allocated exclusively to
that separate interest.
(2) Notwithstanding the provisions of the declaration, internal
and external telephone wiring designed to serve a single separate
interest, but located outside the boundaries of the separate
interest, are exclusive use common areas allocated exclusively to
that separate interest.
(j) "Governing documents" means the declaration and any other
documents, such as bylaws, operating rules of the association,
articles of incorporation, or articles of association, which govern
the operation of the common interest development or association.
(k) "Planned development" means a development (other than a
community apartment project, a condominium project, or a stock
cooperative) having either or both of the following features:
(1) The common area is owned either by an association or in common
by the owners of the separate interests who possess appurtenant
rights to the beneficial use and enjoyment of the common area.
(2) A power exists in the association to enforce an obligation of
an owner of a separate interest with respect to the beneficial use
and enjoyment of the common area by means of an assessment which may
become a lien upon the separate interests in accordance with Section
1367 or 1367.1.
(l) "Separate interest" has the following meanings:
(1) In a community apartment project, "separate interest" means
the exclusive right to occupy an apartment, as specified in
subdivision (d).
(2) In a condominium project, "separate interest" means an
individual unit, as specified in subdivision (f).
(3) In a planned development, "separate interest" means a
separately owned lot, parcel, area, or space.
(4) In a stock cooperative, "separate interest" means the
exclusive right to occupy a portion of the real property, as
specified in subdivision (m).
Unless the declaration or condominium plan, if any exists,
otherwise provides, if walls, floors, or ceilings are designated as
boundaries of a separate interest, the interior surfaces of the
perimeter walls, floors, ceilings, windows, doors, and outlets
located within the separate interest are part of the separate
interest and any other portions of the walls, floors, or ceilings are
part of the common areas.
The estate in a separate interest may be a fee, a life estate, an
estate for years, or any combination of the foregoing.
(m) "Stock cooperative" means a development in which a corporation
is formed or availed of, primarily for the purpose of holding title
to, either in fee simple or for a term of years, improved real
property, and all or substantially all of the shareholders of the
corporation receive a right of exclusive occupancy in a portion of
the real property, title to which is held by the corporation. The
owners' interest in the corporation, whether evidenced by a share of
stock, a certificate of membership, or otherwise, shall be deemed to
be an interest in a common interest development and a real estate
development for purposes of subdivision (f) of Section 25100 of the
Corporations Code.
A "stock cooperative" includes a limited equity housing
cooperative which is a stock cooperative that meets the criteria of
Section 33007.5 of the Health and Safety Code.
====================
--
Skitt (in Hayward, California)
www.geocities.com/opus731/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Skitt
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 29, 2005 2:22 am
Post subject: Re: "apartments" in England and the Vatican |
|
|
Areff wrote:
| Quote: | Skitt wrote:
Murray Arnow wrote:
Skitt wrote:
I see. I have never come across one. I have very limited
experience in anything other than owning houses, and when I studied
real estate cooperative apartments didn't exist. That was long
ago.
How far back did you study? Co-operative apartments have been around
in Chicago for over 50 years, although they are now being rapidly
replaced by condominiums. A co-op is an apartment building owned
equally by its tenants and share a common mortgage. The usage of
co-operative apartments may have changed over time, however.
I studied California real estate law back in the early 'seventies.
The California Civil Code (can't wait for Erk forever, y'know) calls
them "stock cooperatives". See:
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cacodes/civ/1351.html
|
Yeah, I posted the code just a little while ago.
--
Skitt (in Hayward, California)
www.geocities.com/opus731/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Robert Bannister
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 29, 2005 5:49 am
Post subject: Re: "apartments" in England and the Vatican |
|
|
Frances Kemmish wrote:
| Quote: | Robert Bannister wrote:
It was hotplate when I lived there, although "gas-ring" would be more
likely.
Our first flat was a bedsit, with a shared bathroom. It had a Baby Belling.
|
I remember the name, so I must have lived in a bedsit that had one, but
I can't remember what it was.
--
Rob Bannister |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Robert Bannister
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 29, 2005 5:50 am
Post subject: Re: "apartments" in England and the Vatican |
|
|
Areff wrote:
| Quote: | Robert Bannister wrote:
Andrew Gwilliam wrote:
Incidentally, AusE also has "unit", which is approximately equivalent to
BrE "purpose-built flat".
The main difference would be that a unit is not in a block of flats
(although it may be in a block of units) - ie it is a one-storey
building with or without shared walls. My own unit does not share any
wall with the adjoining ones.
Er, wait a minute. How can it have "adjoining units" if it doesn't share
any walls with said units? Where's the adjoining? WAIM?
My carport shares a wall with the next-door unit on one side, and on the |
other side, I share a wall with their carport, but no actual rooms share
walls.
--
Rob Bannister |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wood Avens
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 29, 2005 3:33 pm
Post subject: Re: "apartments" in England and the Vatican |
|
|
On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 07:49:07 +0800, Robert Bannister
<robban@it.net.au> wrote:
| Quote: | Frances Kemmish wrote:
Our first flat was a bedsit, with a shared bathroom. It had a Baby Belling.
I remember the name, so I must have lived in a bedsit that had one, but
I can't remember what it was.
|
See http://www.bellingappliances.co.uk/cooking/tabletop.htm
None of these looks exactly like the Baby Belling I remember from the
late 60s, but the idea is much the same.
--
Katy Jennison
spamtrap: remove the first two letters after the @ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Frances Kemmish
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 29, 2005 3:52 pm
Post subject: Re: "apartments" in England and the Vatican |
|
|
Wood Avens wrote:
| Quote: | On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 07:49:07 +0800, Robert Bannister
robban@it.net.au> wrote:
Frances Kemmish wrote:
Our first flat was a bedsit, with a shared bathroom. It had a Baby Belling.
I remember the name, so I must have lived in a bedsit that had one, but
I can't remember what it was.
See http://www.bellingappliances.co.uk/cooking/tabletop.htm
None of these looks exactly like the Baby Belling I remember from the
late 60s, but the idea is much the same.
|
This is more or less what ours looked like:
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/paul.linnell/sso/bellingbabycatalogue.jpg
I don't remember cooking a meal of that size on ours, although I do
remember setting fire to lamb chops.
Fran |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Holmes
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 29, 2005 3:56 pm
Post subject: Re: "apartments" in England and the Vatican |
|
|
Areff wrote:
| Quote: | John Holmes wrote:
Areff wrote:
Er, wait a minute. How can it have "adjoining units" if it doesn't
share any walls with said units? Where's the adjoining? WAIM?
Sometimes there's a garage in between, sometimes a walled
courtyard/garden, sometimes just a fence, or some combination of
these. There usually isn't a shared wall between the indoors part of
one unit and the next.
Gotcha. But only in the first case (garage) can I see how the units
would be "adjoining".
|
So, in Areffian, New York and Pennsylvania aren't adjoining states
because nobody's built a party wall along the border?
--
Regards
John
for mail: my initials plus a u e
at tpg dot com dot au |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Areff
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 29, 2005 4:55 pm
Post subject: Re: "apartments" in England and the Vatican |
|
|
John Holmes wrote:
| Quote: | Areff wrote:
John Holmes wrote:
Areff wrote:
Er, wait a minute. How can it have "adjoining units" if it doesn't
share any walls with said units? Where's the adjoining? WAIM?
Sometimes there's a garage in between, sometimes a walled
courtyard/garden, sometimes just a fence, or some combination of
these. There usually isn't a shared wall between the indoors part of
one unit and the next.
Gotcha. But only in the first case (garage) can I see how the units
would be "adjoining".
So, in Areffian, New York and Pennsylvania aren't adjoining states
because nobody's built a party wall along the border?
|
The state are adjoining. And the *plots* (or *lots*) on which those units
sit are adjoining. But if they don't share some sort of wall or the like,
the *units* aren't adjoining. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Areff
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 29, 2005 7:50 pm
Post subject: Re: "apartments" in England and the Vatican |
|
|
Skitt wrote:
| Quote: | Then, of course, there a double-wides.
|
A you sure about that? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Linz
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 29, 2005 8:34 pm
Post subject: Re: "apartments" in England and the Vatican |
|
|
"Tony Cooper" <tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:r73v61l4312atrseccnpmpscqnoinvdl6m@4ax.com...
| Quote: | On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 12:45:55 +0100, "Linz"
spam@lindsayendell.co.uk
wrote:
"Andrew Gwilliam" <bottomless_pit@southernskies.co.uk> wrote in
message news:426aa4b9$0$38037$bed64819@news.gradwell.net...
On Sat, 23 Apr 2005 14:01:58 GMT, Tony Cooper wrote:
On Sat, 23 Apr 2005 19:56:55 +1000, Narelle <n3310@excite.com
wrote:
But then, I live in an attached dual occupancy. Do you have
those elsewhere?
We certainly have them in the US, but we call them "doubles". A
single house divided into two living quarters is a "double". If
it's divided into three units (usually two down and one up),
it's a "triplex".
These sound like BrE "semi-detached houses" (or just plain old
"semi"). They're particularly associated with suburbs.
I'm not sure who I'm misunderstanding, but Tony's "double" sounds
nothing like a semi.
I think they are. An American "double" is one building where two
families live. The middle wall is a common wall. Just think of
two small houses stuck together with the unnecessary end wall of
one of the houses removed because the end wall of the other house
becomes the common middle wall.
|
That sounds like a semi, but your original description didn't. A
single house divided into two living quarters would have one front
door over here, whereas a semi is, as you describe, two houses sharing
a party wall - so two front doors, two back doors, two mirror-image
houses. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tony Cooper
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 29, 2005 9:37 pm
Post subject: Re: "apartments" in England and the Vatican |
|
|
On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 15:34:44 +0100, "Linz" <spam@lindsayendell.co.uk>
wrote:
| Quote: |
I think they are. An American "double" is one building where two
families live. The middle wall is a common wall. Just think of
two small houses stuck together with the unnecessary end wall of
one of the houses removed because the end wall of the other house
becomes the common middle wall.
That sounds like a semi, but your original description didn't. A
single house divided into two living quarters would have one front
door over here, whereas a semi is, as you describe, two houses sharing
a party wall - so two front doors, two back doors, two mirror-image
houses.
|
I think the misunderstanding is the use of "living quarters". A
"double", to me, is one construction containing two private homes with
a common wall. Two of everything, including front doors.
I don't know about that "party wall". Sounds like something decorated
with balloons and streamers.
--
Tony Cooper
Orlando FL |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
FAQ
Memberlist
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in