| Author |
Message |
Francois Grieu
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2005 5:53 pm
Post subject: meaning of "all but" |
|
|
From the press [*]
A major American city all but disintegrated, as the
expected death toll from Hurricane Katrina mushroomed
into the thousands in New Orleans.
In the context, I understand
"New Orleans sort of disintegrated".
Is this the correct usage of this "all but" construct ?
I though "all but" implies that what follows does NOT apply.
TIA,
François Grieu (guess what, from France)
[*] http://www.freep.com/news/nw/katrina1e_20050901.htm
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
the Omrud
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2005 5:58 pm
Post subject: Re: meaning of "all but" |
|
|
Francois Grieu spake thusly:
| Quote: | From the press [*]
A major American city all but disintegrated, as the
expected death toll from Hurricane Katrina mushroomed
into the thousands in New Orleans.
In the context, I understand
"New Orleans sort of disintegrated".
Is this the correct usage of this "all but" construct ?
|
Yes, but it doesn't mean quite what you think.
| Quote: | I though "all but" implies that what follows does NOT apply.
|
Yes that's part of the meaning but not all of it. It also means that
the following *very nearly* does apply. So the sentence means that
New Orleans has very nearly been disintegrated.
I wouldn't use "disintegrated" here, but it's clear what is meant.
--
David
=====
replace usenet with the |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Adrian Bailey
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2005 9:21 pm
Post subject: Re: meaning of "all but" |
|
|
"Francois Grieu" <fgrieu@francenet.fr> wrote in message
news:fgrieu-53A6B1.13533601092005@news1-e.proxad.net...
| Quote: | From the press [*]
A major American city all but disintegrated, as the
expected death toll from Hurricane Katrina mushroomed
into the thousands in New Orleans.
In the context, I understand
"New Orleans sort of disintegrated".
|
No.
| Quote: | Is this the correct usage of this "all but" construct ?
I though "all but" implies that what follows does NOT apply.
|
Correct. New Orleans didn't disintegrate. But it almost did. It's a lot less
integrated than it was a few days ago.
Adrian
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pat Durkin
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2005 9:52 pm
Post subject: Re: meaning of "all but" |
|
|
"Adrian Bailey" <dadge@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:60FRe.31$bi5.0@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
| Quote: | "Francois Grieu" <fgrieu@francenet.fr> wrote in message
news:fgrieu-53A6B1.13533601092005@news1-e.proxad.net...
From the press [*]
A major American city all but disintegrated, as the
expected death toll from Hurricane Katrina mushroomed
into the thousands in New Orleans.
In the context, I understand
"New Orleans sort of disintegrated".
No.
Is this the correct usage of this "all but" construct ?
I though "all but" implies that what follows does NOT apply.
Correct. New Orleans didn't disintegrate. But it almost did. It's a lot
less
integrated than it was a few days ago.
|
In the sense of having its integral parts in a state of destruction and
non-accessibility, I would say that disintegrated is probably as apt a
description as one can get.
The various parts of the infrastructure are inoperative, blocked, destroyed.
The essential city, health and power services are non-functioning. Central
communication is non-existent.
The town will be re-integrated, but it is difficult to say how much of the
"Big Easy" will be restored. (Come easy, go easy!)
I think of all of the apocalyptic stories and films I have read/seen. This
fits right in there. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tony Cooper
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2005 10:57 pm
Post subject: Re: meaning of "all but" |
|
|
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 15:52:03 GMT, "Pat Durkin" <durkinpa@nothome.com>
wrote:
| Quote: |
"Adrian Bailey" <dadge@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:60FRe.31$bi5.0@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
"Francois Grieu" <fgrieu@francenet.fr> wrote in message
news:fgrieu-53A6B1.13533601092005@news1-e.proxad.net...
From the press [*]
A major American city all but disintegrated, as the
expected death toll from Hurricane Katrina mushroomed
into the thousands in New Orleans.
In the context, I understand
"New Orleans sort of disintegrated".
No.
Is this the correct usage of this "all but" construct ?
I though "all but" implies that what follows does NOT apply.
Correct. New Orleans didn't disintegrate. But it almost did. It's a lot
less
integrated than it was a few days ago.
In the sense of having its integral parts in a state of destruction and
non-accessibility, I would say that disintegrated is probably as apt a
description as one can get.
The various parts of the infrastructure are inoperative, blocked, destroyed.
The essential city, health and power services are non-functioning. Central
communication is non-existent.
The town will be re-integrated, but it is difficult to say how much of the
"Big Easy" will be restored. (Come easy, go easy!)
I think of all of the apocalyptic stories and films I have read/seen. This
fits right in there.
|
Wasn't San Francisco re-built? I don't think you can restore what
existed in the past, but you can re-build.
--
Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pat Durkin
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2005 11:52 pm
Post subject: Re: meaning of "all but" |
|
|
"Tony Cooper" <tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:ulceh11ph612cs5njp5ddt5mmuosbe9nmf@4ax.com...
| Quote: | On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 15:52:03 GMT, "Pat Durkin" <durkinpa@nothome.com
wrote:
"Adrian Bailey" <dadge@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:60FRe.31$bi5.0@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
"Francois Grieu" <fgrieu@francenet.fr> wrote in message
news:fgrieu-53A6B1.13533601092005@news1-e.proxad.net...
From the press [*]
A major American city all but disintegrated, as the
expected death toll from Hurricane Katrina mushroomed
into the thousands in New Orleans.
In the context, I understand
"New Orleans sort of disintegrated".
No.
Is this the correct usage of this "all but" construct ?
I though "all but" implies that what follows does NOT apply.
Correct. New Orleans didn't disintegrate. But it almost did. It's a lot
less
integrated than it was a few days ago.
In the sense of having its integral parts in a state of destruction and
non-accessibility, I would say that disintegrated is probably as apt a
description as one can get.
The various parts of the infrastructure are inoperative, blocked,
destroyed.
The essential city, health and power services are non-functioning.
Central
communication is non-existent.
The town will be re-integrated, but it is difficult to say how much of
the
"Big Easy" will be restored. (Come easy, go easy!)
I think of all of the apocalyptic stories and films I have read/seen.
This
fits right in there.
Wasn't San Francisco re-built? I don't think you can restore what
existed in the past, but you can re-build.
|
And they learned a thing or two about earthquakes, and they continued
building.
The reports are not in yet in on building a nuclear facility on a known
fault line.
In the case of a city re-building on subsiding land, in the face of rising
waters and global warming, I would consider the cost to the nation as a
whole. Can the US afford New Orleans? Is the nation being _asked_ if it
can afford to rebuild NO? Must the nation buy back and continue to protect
the private land? Shall the oil companies be subsidized, reimbursed and be
forced to move?
I am glad I don't have to decide how best to re-establish the municipality.
What choices will face the people evacuated by bus from the Superdome to the
Astrodome? Will enough safe low-cost housing be built in New Orleans to
enable those people to live in their former neighborhoods?
I can't help but think of the term being bandied about these days--displaced
persons, or DPs. The desolation of war could not be worse than what has
become of New Orleans. Should we take a lesson from Hamburg, or Dresden in
how to rebuild? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike Lyle
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2005 3:44 am
Post subject: Re: meaning of "all but" |
|
|
Pat Durkin wrote:
| Quote: | "Tony Cooper" <tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:ulceh11ph612cs5njp5ddt5mmuosbe9nmf@4ax.com...
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 15:52:03 GMT, "Pat Durkin"
durkinpa@nothome.com
wrote:
[...]
I think of all of the apocalyptic stories and films I have
read/seen. This fits right in there.
|
Yes, except it's limited to a relatively small area. Horrible, and
unbearable to think about; but it doesn't get apocalyptic till
there's nowhere from which help can come. (I do hope this won't be
misunderstood, but I suppose it will be.)
| Quote: |
Wasn't San Francisco re-built? I don't think you can restore what
existed in the past, but you can re-build.
And they learned a thing or two about earthquakes, and they
continued
building.
[...] |
This is my cue to ask our engineers something which has been on my
mind, and worrying me. (I know nothing about the subject, beyond the
great Tay Bridge disaster and the Tacoma Narrows.) Were those New
Orleans bridges sub-standard? The awful news pictures looked to me
more like what I'd have expected from an earthquake than from a
storm, however violent. Surely bridges should be built to withstand
the worst weather conditions imaginable for a place, multiplied by
some safety factor? One of them looked, to a non-engineer who's
played with dominoes and card-houses, as though failure of one
section would inevitably cause failure of all the others: that can't
be right, can it?
--
Mike. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Harvey Van Sickle
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2005 3:50 am
Post subject: Re: meaning of "all but" |
|
|
On 01 Sep 2005, Mike Lyle wrote
| Quote: | Pat Durkin wrote:
"Tony Cooper" <tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:ulceh11ph612cs5njp5ddt5mmuosbe9nmf@4ax.com...
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 15:52:03 GMT, "Pat Durkin"
durkinpa@nothome.com
wrote:
[...]
I think of all of the apocalyptic stories and films I have
read/seen. This fits right in there.
Yes, except it's limited to a relatively small area. Horrible, and
unbearable to think about; but it doesn't get apocalyptic till
there's nowhere from which help can come. (I do hope this won't be
misunderstood, but I suppose it will be.)
Wasn't San Francisco re-built? I don't think you can restore what
existed in the past, but you can re-build.
And they learned a thing or two about earthquakes, and they
continued
building.
[...]
This is my cue to ask our engineers something which has been on my
mind, and worrying me. (I know nothing about the subject, beyond the
great Tay Bridge disaster and the Tacoma Narrows.) Were those New
Orleans bridges sub-standard? The awful news pictures looked to me
more like what I'd have expected from an earthquake than from a
storm, however violent.
|
I'm not an engineer, but I suspect you're underestimating the power of
the forces at work here -- probably because the term "storm", whilst
correct, implies "it's just weather", and seriously downplays the
effects of 150 mph winds and masses of rapidly-moving water.
--
Cheers, Harvey
Canadian (30 years) and British (23 years)
For e-mail, change harvey.news to harvey.van |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ray o'hara
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2005 4:22 am
Post subject: Re: meaning of "all but" |
|
|
"Mike Lyle" <mike_lyle_uk@REMOVETHISyahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3npb3mF21qkdU2@individual.net...
| Quote: | Pat Durkin wrote:
"Tony Cooper" <tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:ulceh11ph612cs5njp5ddt5mmuosbe9nmf@4ax.com...
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 15:52:03 GMT, "Pat Durkin"
durkinpa@nothome.com
wrote:
[...]
I think of all of the apocalyptic stories and films I have
read/seen. This fits right in there.
Yes, except it's limited to a relatively small area. Horrible, and
unbearable to think about; but it doesn't get apocalyptic till
there's nowhere from which help can come. (I do hope this won't be
misunderstood, but I suppose it will be.)
Wasn't San Francisco re-built? I don't think you can restore what
existed in the past, but you can re-build.
And they learned a thing or two about earthquakes, and they
continued
building.
[...]
This is my cue to ask our engineers something which has been on my
mind, and worrying me. (I know nothing about the subject, beyond the
great Tay Bridge disaster and the Tacoma Narrows.) Were those New
Orleans bridges sub-standard? The awful news pictures looked to me
more like what I'd have expected from an earthquake than from a
storm, however violent. Surely bridges should be built to withstand
the worst weather conditions imaginable for a place, multiplied by
some safety factor? One of them looked, to a non-engineer who's
played with dominoes and card-houses, as though failure of one
section would inevitably cause failure of all the others: that can't
be right, can it?
--
Mike.
|
Water hits with thousands of tons of force. There is no force in man or
nature that is more destructive. Nothing can withstand that much pressure.
When you build there you accept the fact that it will periodically be
destroyed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pat Durkin
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 02, 2005 7:01 am
Post subject: Re: meaning of "all but" |
|
|
"Mike Lyle" <mike_lyle_uk@REMOVETHISyahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3npb3mF21qkdU2@individual.net...
| Quote: | Pat Durkin wrote:
"Tony Cooper" <tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:ulceh11ph612cs5njp5ddt5mmuosbe9nmf@4ax.com...
On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 15:52:03 GMT, "Pat Durkin"
durkinpa@nothome.com
wrote:
[...]
I think of all of the apocalyptic stories and films I have
read/seen. This fits right in there.
Yes, except it's limited to a relatively small area. Horrible, and
unbearable to think about; but it doesn't get apocalyptic till
there's nowhere from which help can come. (I do hope this won't be
misunderstood, but I suppose it will be.)
|
How misunderstood?
The people within those areas of the city that are cut off from access don't
know the extent of the damage. They do know that there is little or no
communication from government agencies, and they may perceive that their
lives are rapidly reverting to elemental survival techniques. They don't
know where their next meal is coming from. Maybe they think the government
is God, but you know, when the government gets things organized again, God
will get the credit, and government will get the blame. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in