British GP

[pP85PrR]

Exciting at the front!

Interesting how strategy decisions have potentially strong influence on
the drivers' results. As Martin Brundle reiterated: "The right tire at
the right time."

A personal opinion: so good not to see a sea of orange shirts setting
off their orange flares. Do I remember correctly that there was a
prohibition on those flares at one point in the last season or two?

[Alan]

Post by pP85PrR
Exciting at the front!
Interesting how strategy decisions have potentially strong influence on
the drivers' results. As Martin Brundle reiterated: "The right tire at
the right time."
A personal opinion: so good not to see a sea of orange shirts setting
off their orange flares. Do I remember correctly that there was a
prohibition on those flares at one point in the last season or two?

Fantastic to have three different cars...

...(and 5 different drivers--sorry Sergio, but you're just not there at
the moment)...

...all with a legitimate shot at being the fastest at any given track.

McLaren clearly got a couple of strategy calls wrong:

not double-stacking Oscar ruined his race,

and the tougher call of medium vs soft for Norris (rewatching the race
fromm Norris's in-car feed shows it ended up being a joint decision with
Norris first mentioning choosing the same tires as Hamilton). Piastri
ended up gaining about 16-17 seconds on Norris by choosing the medium,
so that choice is going to haunt Norris for a while.

But it was brilliant driving by everyone at the top.

Congrats, Lewis!

[Geoff]

Post by Alan

Post by pP85PrR
Exciting at the front!
Interesting how strategy decisions have potentially strong influence
on the drivers' results. As Martin Brundle reiterated: "The right tire
at the right time."
A personal opinion: so good not to see a sea of orange shirts setting
off their orange flares. Do I remember correctly that there was a
prohibition on those flares at one point in the last season or two?

Fantastic to have three different cars...
...(and 5 different drivers--sorry Sergio, but you're just not there at
the moment)...
...all with a legitimate shot at being the fastest at any given track.
not double-stacking Oscar ruined his race,
and the tougher call of medium vs soft for Norris (rewatching the race
fromm Norris's in-car feed shows it ended up being a joint decision with
Norris first mentioning choosing the same tires as Hamilton). Piastri
ended up gaining about 16-17 seconds on Norris by choosing the medium,
so that choice is going to haunt Norris for a while.
But it was brilliant driving by everyone at the top.
Congrats, Lewis!

Yes, hard looked to be the right choice.

And yes, it was inevitable, but sad to see NOR simply bend over for VET
like that.

Wouldn't need to be unsporting or illegal, but sure wouldn't have
happened so easily if it was the other way around.

geoff

[Alan]

Post by Geoff

Post by Alan

Post by pP85PrR
Exciting at the front!
Interesting how strategy decisions have potentially strong influence
on the drivers' results. As Martin Brundle reiterated: "The right
tire at the right time."
A personal opinion: so good not to see a sea of orange shirts setting
off their orange flares. Do I remember correctly that there was a
prohibition on those flares at one point in the last season or two?

Fantastic to have three different cars...
...(and 5 different drivers--sorry Sergio, but you're just not there
at the moment)...
...all with a legitimate shot at being the fastest at any given track.
not double-stacking Oscar ruined his race,
and the tougher call of medium vs soft for Norris (rewatching the race
fromm Norris's in-car feed shows it ended up being a joint decision
with Norris first mentioning choosing the same tires as Hamilton).
Piastri ended up gaining about 16-17 seconds on Norris by choosing the
medium, so that choice is going to haunt Norris for a while.
But it was brilliant driving by everyone at the top.
Congrats, Lewis!

Yes, hard looked to be the right choice.
And yes, it was inevitable, but sad to see NOR simply bend over for VET
like that.

Bend over? Please.

There is no way to prevent someone with that great an overspeed from
overtaking.

Post by Geoff
Wouldn't need to be unsporting or illegal, but sure wouldn't have
happened so easily if it was the other way around.

You mean like when Verstappen had to let Norris by on the Hangar
Straight on lap 15?

Verstappen knew he could stop Norris on that lap, and Norris knew the
very same when Verstappen overtook him.

[Geoff]

Post by Alan

Post by Geoff

Post by Alan

Post by pP85PrR
Exciting at the front!
Interesting how strategy decisions have potentially strong influence
on the drivers' results. As Martin Brundle reiterated: "The right
tire at the right time."
A personal opinion: so good not to see a sea of orange shirts
setting off their orange flares. Do I remember correctly that there
was a prohibition on those flares at one point in the last season or
two?

Fantastic to have three different cars...
...(and 5 different drivers--sorry Sergio, but you're just not there
at the moment)...
...all with a legitimate shot at being the fastest at any given track.
not double-stacking Oscar ruined his race,
and the tougher call of medium vs soft for Norris (rewatching the
race fromm Norris's in-car feed shows it ended up being a joint
decision with Norris first mentioning choosing the same tires as
Hamilton). Piastri ended up gaining about 16-17 seconds on Norris by
choosing the medium, so that choice is going to haunt Norris for a
while.
But it was brilliant driving by everyone at the top.
Congrats, Lewis!

Yes, hard looked to be the right choice.
And yes, it was inevitable, but sad to see NOR simply bend over for
VET like that.

Bend over? Please.
There is no way to prevent someone with that great an overspeed from
overtaking.

No, but it could conceivably have been made a little more difficult than
that. VER certainly would have tried harder.

Post by Alan

Post by Geoff
Wouldn't need to be unsporting or illegal, but sure wouldn't have
happened so easily if it was the other way around.

You mean like when Verstappen had to let Norris by on the Hangar
Straight on lap 15?

Not exactly the most critical point in the race.

geoff

[Alan]

Post by Geoff

Post by Alan

Post by Geoff

Post by Alan

Post by pP85PrR
Exciting at the front!
Interesting how strategy decisions have potentially strong
"The right tire at the right time."
A personal opinion: so good not to see a sea of orange shirts
setting off their orange flares. Do I remember correctly that there
was a prohibition on those flares at one point in the last season
or two?

Fantastic to have three different cars...
...(and 5 different drivers--sorry Sergio, but you're just not there
at the moment)...
...all with a legitimate shot at being the fastest at any given track.
not double-stacking Oscar ruined his race,
and the tougher call of medium vs soft for Norris (rewatching the
race fromm Norris's in-car feed shows it ended up being a joint
decision with Norris first mentioning choosing the same tires as
Hamilton). Piastri ended up gaining about 16-17 seconds on Norris by
choosing the medium, so that choice is going to haunt Norris for a
while.
But it was brilliant driving by everyone at the top.
Congrats, Lewis!

Yes, hard looked to be the right choice.
And yes, it was inevitable, but sad to see NOR simply bend over for
VET like that.

Bend over? Please.
There is no way to prevent someone with that great an overspeed from
overtaking.

No, but it could conceivably have been made a little more difficult than
that. VER certainly would have tried harder.

Someone has that much more speed than you on the straight, the only way
to stop him from passing is to weave...

...which for very good reason is against the rules.

[Geoff]

Post by Alan

Post by pP85PrR
Exciting at the front!
Interesting how strategy decisions have potentially strong influence
on the drivers' results. As Martin Brundle reiterated: "The right tire
at the right time."
A personal opinion: so good not to see a sea of orange shirts setting
off their orange flares. Do I remember correctly that there was a
prohibition on those flares at one point in the last season or two?

Fantastic to have three different cars...
...(and 5 different drivers--sorry Sergio, but you're just not there at
the moment)...
...all with a legitimate shot at being the fastest at any given track.
not double-stacking Oscar ruined his race,
and the tougher call of medium vs soft for Norris (rewatching the race
fromm Norris's in-car feed shows it ended up being a joint decision with
Norris first mentioning choosing the same tires as Hamilton). Piastri
ended up gaining about 16-17 seconds on Norris by choosing the medium,
so that choice is going to haunt Norris for a while.
But it was brilliant driving by everyone at the top.
Congrats, Lewis!

Surprising that none of the haters have come out with "HAM wouldn't have
won if RUS hadn't been retired because Mercedes favour HAM" yet.

geoff

[Alan]

Post by Geoff

Post by Alan

Post by pP85PrR
Exciting at the front!
Interesting how strategy decisions have potentially strong influence
on the drivers' results. As Martin Brundle reiterated: "The right
tire at the right time."
A personal opinion: so good not to see a sea of orange shirts setting
off their orange flares. Do I remember correctly that there was a
prohibition on those flares at one point in the last season or two?

Fantastic to have three different cars...
...(and 5 different drivers--sorry Sergio, but you're just not there
at the moment)...
...all with a legitimate shot at being the fastest at any given track.
not double-stacking Oscar ruined his race,
and the tougher call of medium vs soft for Norris (rewatching the race
fromm Norris's in-car feed shows it ended up being a joint decision
with Norris first mentioning choosing the same tires as Hamilton).
Piastri ended up gaining about 16-17 seconds on Norris by choosing the
medium, so that choice is going to haunt Norris for a while.
But it was brilliant driving by everyone at the top.
Congrats, Lewis!

Surprising that none of the haters have come out with "HAM wouldn't have
won if RUS hadn't been retired because Mercedes favour HAM" yet.

Sorry... ...not a hater.

I don't know who would have won if Russell hadn't retired.

[Geoff]

Post by Alan

Post by Geoff

Post by Alan

Post by pP85PrR
Exciting at the front!
Interesting how strategy decisions have potentially strong influence
on the drivers' results. As Martin Brundle reiterated: "The right
tire at the right time."
A personal opinion: so good not to see a sea of orange shirts
setting off their orange flares. Do I remember correctly that there
was a prohibition on those flares at one point in the last season or
two?

Fantastic to have three different cars...
...(and 5 different drivers--sorry Sergio, but you're just not there
at the moment)...
...all with a legitimate shot at being the fastest at any given track.
not double-stacking Oscar ruined his race,
and the tougher call of medium vs soft for Norris (rewatching the
race fromm Norris's in-car feed shows it ended up being a joint
decision with Norris first mentioning choosing the same tires as
Hamilton). Piastri ended up gaining about 16-17 seconds on Norris by
choosing the medium, so that choice is going to haunt Norris for a
while.
But it was brilliant driving by everyone at the top.
Congrats, Lewis!

Surprising that none of the haters have come out with "HAM wouldn't
have won if RUS hadn't been retired because Mercedes favour HAM" yet.

Sorry... ...not a hater.
I don't know who would have won if Russell hadn't retired.

Absolutely. But if RUS had been in the mix all sorts of other
permuations may have eventuated. We simply can't know ;- )

geoff

[Mark]

Post by pP85PrR
Exciting at the front!
Interesting how strategy decisions have potentially strong influence on
the drivers' results. As Martin Brundle reiterated: "The right tire at
the right time."

No - I heard him very clearly say "...the right *tyre* at the right
time...". ;-)

[pP85PrR]

Post by Mark

Post by pP85PrR
Exciting at the front!
Interesting how strategy decisions have potentially strong influence on
the drivers' results. As Martin Brundle reiterated: "The right tire at
the right time."

No - I heard him very clearly say "...the right *tyre* at the right
time...". ;-)

Not "...the right tyre at the ryte time..."?

[Mark]

Post by pP85PrR

Post by Mark

Post by pP85PrR
Exciting at the front!
Interesting how strategy decisions have potentially strong influence on
the drivers' results. As Martin Brundle reiterated: "The right tire at
the right time."

No - I heard him very clearly say "...the right *tyre* at the right
time...". ;-)

Not "...the right tyre at the ryte time..."?

Never attempt to apply phonetic rules to a non-phonetic language. And
all variants of English are inconsistent in that...

[Yazoo]

Post by Mark

Post by pP85PrR

Post by Mark

Post by pP85PrR
Exciting at the front!
Interesting how strategy decisions have potentially strong influence on
the drivers' results. As Martin Brundle reiterated: "The right tire at
the right time."

No - I heard him very clearly say "...the right *tyre* at the right
time...". ;-)

Not "...the right tyre at the ryte time..."?

Never attempt to apply phonetic rules to a non-phonetic language. And
all variants of English are inconsistent in that...

Well, this is international group, so here we are from all over the
world. For some of us English is not native language, so such errors
occurs are normal.

The only importan thing is that we understand each other, right? :)

[Mark]

Post by Yazoo

Post by Mark

Post by pP85PrR

Post by Mark

Post by pP85PrR
Exciting at the front!
Interesting how strategy decisions have potentially strong influence on
the drivers' results. As Martin Brundle reiterated: "The right tire at
the right time."

No - I heard him very clearly say "...the right *tyre* at the right
time...". ;-)

Not "...the right tyre at the ryte time..."?

Never attempt to apply phonetic rules to a non-phonetic language. And
all variants of English are inconsistent in that...

Well, this is international group, so here we are from all over the
world. For some of us English is not native language, so such errors
occurs are normal.
The only importan thing is that we understand each other, right? :)

Yes - my initial joke was a (friendly) english-english jibe (UK to US)
because of the way they changed the language* and then tell us we're
"wrong".

I'm not generally a nitpicker when it comes to spelling or grammar
(though I try to be correct myself). For me, you sum it up: language is
for conveying ideas, so understanding is key.

So, the one time I do question it is when the spelling or grammatical
error introduces ambiguity. English (in particular) has a huge number of
word pairs that either look the same but are pronounced differently
(lead as a metal vs lead to be at the front of), or that look different
but are pronounced the same way. (lead as the metal vs led to have been
leading in the past). Even words like "Polish" at the start of a
sentence need the following words to know if that's related to a
nationality (from Poland pronounced poe-lish) or shining something
(poh-lish). And sometimes that matters...and sometimes it's used to
create puns and other wordplay. I have no idea how non-native speakers
cope with English.

* And it's inconsistent in any case. Sometimes the divergence simplifies
the language, but not all of it. Webster is often put forward as someone
who was refining the language, but he was quite explicit that his
original intent was to create a point of diversion. He felt that a true
country also needed its own language. He wanted American English to
break with British English. Hence, some of the changes really don't make
a great deal of sense other than to be "different" to English.

[News]

Post by Mark

Post by Yazoo

Post by Mark

Post by pP85PrR

Post by Mark

Post by pP85PrR
Exciting at the front!
Interesting how strategy decisions have potentially strong influence on
the drivers' results. As Martin Brundle reiterated: "The right tire at
the right time."

No - I heard him very clearly say "...the right *tyre* at the right
time...". ;-)

Not "...the right tyre at the ryte time..."?

Never attempt to apply phonetic rules to a non-phonetic language. And
all variants of English are inconsistent in that...

Well, this is international group, so here we are from all over the
world. For some of us English is not native language, so such errors
occurs are normal.
The only importan thing is that we understand each other, right? :)

Yes - my initial joke was a (friendly) english-english jibe (UK to US)
because of the way they changed the language* and then tell us we're
"wrong".
I'm not generally a nitpicker when it comes to spelling or grammar
(though I try to be correct myself). For me, you sum it up: language is
for conveying ideas, so understanding is key.
So, the one time I do question it is when the spelling or grammatical
error introduces ambiguity. English (in particular) has a huge number of
word pairs that either look the same but are pronounced differently
(lead as a metal vs lead to be at the front of), or that look different
but are pronounced the same way. (lead as the metal vs led to have been
leading in the past). Even words like "Polish" at the start of a
sentence need the following words to know if that's related to a
nationality (from Poland pronounced poe-lish) or shining something
(poh-lish). And sometimes that matters...and sometimes it's used to
create puns and other wordplay. I have no idea how non-native speakers
cope with English.
* And it's inconsistent in any case. Sometimes the divergence simplifies
the language, but not all of it. Webster is often put forward as someone
who was refining the language, but he was quite explicit that his
original intent was to create a point of diversion. He felt that a true
country also needed its own language. He wanted American English to
break with British English. Hence, some of the changes really don't make
a great deal of sense other than to be "different" to English.

'Ryte' choice of mandated, remnant, shyte tyres

[Yazoo]

On Tue, 9 Jul 2024 13:52:19 -0000 (UTC), Mark <***@gmail.com>
wrote:

...

Post by Mark
I'm not generally a nitpicker when it comes to spelling or grammar
(though I try to be correct myself). For me, you sum it up: language is
for conveying ideas, so understanding is key.

...

I agree with all you wrote.
As someone who still learns English (after 50+ years of learning), I'm
happy to understand nuances of the language and be able to recognize
the fine lines in between words and phrases.
English can be confusing for us aliens, at times. :)

[Geoff]

Post by Yazoo
...

Post by Mark
I'm not generally a nitpicker when it comes to spelling or grammar
(though I try to be correct myself). For me, you sum it up: language is
for conveying ideas, so understanding is key.

...
I agree with all you wrote.
As someone who still learns English (after 50+ years of learning), I'm
happy to understand nuances of the language and be able to recognize
the fine lines in between words and phrases.
English can be confusing for us aliens, at times. :)

Must be, especially with exposure to US spelling, pronunciation, and
misuse of words !

Not to mention UK range of (extreme) accents.

geoff

[Mark]

Post by Geoff

Post by Yazoo
...

Post by Mark
I'm not generally a nitpicker when it comes to spelling or grammar
(though I try to be correct myself). For me, you sum it up: language is
for conveying ideas, so understanding is key.

...
I agree with all you wrote.
As someone who still learns English (after 50+ years of learning), I'm
happy to understand nuances of the language and be able to recognize
the fine lines in between words and phrases.
English can be confusing for us aliens, at times. :)

Must be, especially with exposure to US spelling, pronunciation, and
misuse of words !
Not to mention UK range of (extreme) accents.

[ Well off-topic... ]

As someone who has spent some years studying Spanish (with some
reasonable French from my schooldays) I'll offer a /small/ crumb of
comfort in defence of English...

Spanish is a wonderful language. It has a much more regular design (very
few irregular verbs in comparison to English or even French), and its
vowels stand out as a gold standard for aiding communication. What I
mean by that is that while English can pronounce vowels in a hundred
different ways[1], Spanish is simply:

A = ah
e = eh
i = ee
o = oh
u = oo

BUT that should make things easy, right? Well, not quite. I have found
the Spanish is much more complicated in other ways. I spend a lot of
time in the south of Spain (Andalucía) where they have some
peculiarities. Like they drop "s" from ends of words that should have
them, and they run words together (almost like compound words), which
takes some time to dial into.

Also a challenge for the English is the fact that every Spanish word (as
far as I know) must be "stressed" once. They make this easy because
most words have the stress on the penultimate syllable, and the
exceptions are shown by the accent[2]. Hence, México is "MEH hico"
(stress on the beginning) whereas Mexico would be "meh HI co" (stress on
the penultimate syllable). Get this wrong and you will *not* be
understood.

At first, I wondered if they were being rude to the foreigner as I was
sure I was using the right words and right consonent vowel
pronunciation...but the stress being wrong is just massively confusing
to Spanish speakers in my experience. They can often work it out with
time and patience, but getting this aspect right is critical.

English - while it's better spoken with the right stresses and cadence -
is completely intelligible to English speakers so long as the words are
right. Hell, most English speakers will understand what's meant even if
whole words are omitted or put into the wrong places. That's not the
case with Spanish.

So, English is hard, irregular and messy...but it's also really flexible
and (kind of) works even when you don't get it right. That quite
possibly why it's been so successful. (I still don't envy those learning
English as a second language!)

1. Consider the "-ough" situation - and I realise this isn't helpful in
a defence of English - where (at least with my pronunciation):

through - ough = oo
thorough - ough = uh
bough - ough = ow
dough - ough = oh
cough - ough = off
rough - ough = uff
ought - ough = or

2. The main one is the one used for stress (the acute): á, é, í, ó, ú.
There is also the tilde (ñ) which turns the "en" sound into an "enya"
and the diaresis (only used for ü) which ensures the "u" is pronounced.

[Yazoo]

Post by Mark
[ Well off-topic... ]
As someone who has spent some years studying Spanish (with some
reasonable French from my schooldays) I'll offer a /small/ crumb of
comfort in defence of English...

Off-topic or not, your post was very interesting read.

I don't want to brag, but learning Croatian (my native) as second
language is very hard for foreign adults. So many word changes,
prefixes, sufixes, variations, rules, exception of rules... you name
it :)

I'm not linguist, but English is quite simple compared to Slavic
languages.

[~misfit~]

Post by Yazoo

Post by Mark
[ Well off-topic... ]
As someone who has spent some years studying Spanish (with some
reasonable French from my schooldays) I'll offer a /small/ crumb of
comfort in defence of English...

As a member of the last UK generation to have gone to a Grammar School (11+ anyone?) I'm trying to
be more Zen about American 'English' but it's a struggle. Especially as a huge number of
non-English speakers are learning 'English' from American media content.

I get that France was instrumental in them winning their war of independence (and giving them a
bloody great big statue to remind them of the fact) so I understand why they pronounce 'filet' as
they do. But then they end 'tourniquet' with a hard T? Seriously. And don't get me started on
'solder'! It's not like they can't pronounce 'colder' of 'folder'...

Post by Yazoo
Off-topic or not, your post was very interesting read.
I don't want to brag, but learning Croatian (my native) as second
language is very hard for foreign adults. So many word changes,
prefixes, sufixes, variations, rules, exception of rules... you name
it :)
I'm not linguist, but English is quite simple compared to Slavic
languages.

Speaking of Slavic languages - but especially cadence - I watch a youtube channel 'Diode Gone Wild'
<https://www.youtube.com/@DiodeGoneWild>. He's from Czechia (according to him) and the way he
speaks is really interesting. It took me a video or two to be able to put it in the backgroud and
just listen to what he's saying. He gets a lot of hate from some (mainly American) English
speakers, some of whom accuse him of playing it up or putting it on. He may be, I wouldn't know.

International pronunciation is very interesting. I've been watching the Moto GP and hear some
English people struggle with 'Jorge'. They mostly /try/ to get it right though - unlike the
Italians I've heard say the name. They don't even try and just say 'Yorg'.

[Geoff]

Post by ~misfit~

Post by Mark
[ Well off-topic... ]
As someone who has spent some years studying Spanish (with some
reasonable French from my schooldays) I'll offer a /small/ crumb of
comfort in defence of English...

As a member of the last UK generation to have gone to a Grammar School
(11+ anyone?) I'm trying to be more Zen about American 'English' but
it's a struggle. Especially as a huge number of non-English speakers are
learning 'English' from American media content.
I get that France was instrumental in them winning their war of
independence (and giving them a bloody great big statue to remind them
of the fact) so I understand why they pronounce 'filet' as they do. But
then they end 'tourniquet' with a hard T? Seriously. And don't get me
started on 'solder'! It's not like they can't pronounce 'colder' of
'folder'...

Hey man, get over it already !

geoff

PS - Yes, it needs a twitch in the time-space continuum.

[Dumas Walker]

Post by ~misfit~
As a member of the last UK generation to have gone to a Grammar School
(11+ anyone?) I'm trying to be more Zen about American 'English' but
it's a struggle. Especially as a huge number of non-English speakers are
learning 'English' from American media content.

As an American, that last bit also concerns me, especially if it is social
media content.


* SLMR 2.1a * I didn't lose my mind; it's here somewhere.

[~misfit~]

Post by Dumas Walker

Post by ~misfit~
As a member of the last UK generation to have gone to a Grammar School
(11+ anyone?) I'm trying to be more Zen about American 'English' but
it's a struggle. Especially as a huge number of non-English speakers are
learning 'English' from American media content.

As an American, that last bit also concerns me, especially if it is social
media content.

Yeah, that's a big thing that's happening - and a huge can of worms that doesn't just affect
language. (For instance right wing nutters here in New Zealand wear MAGA caps etc. <shakes head in
despair>)

[Phil Carmody]

Post by ~misfit~

Post by Dumas Walker

Post by ~misfit~
As a member of the last UK generation to have gone to a Grammar School
(11+ anyone?) I'm trying to be more Zen about American 'English' but
it's a struggle. Especially as a huge number of non-English speakers are
learning 'English' from American media content.

As an American, that last bit also concerns me, especially if it is social
media content.

Yeah, that's a big thing that's happening - and a huge can of worms
that doesn't just affect language. (For instance right wing nutters
here in New Zealand wear MAGA caps etc. <shakes head in despair>)

Make Australia Great Again?

Phil

[~misfit~]

Post by Phil Carmody

Post by ~misfit~

Post by Dumas Walker

Post by ~misfit~
As a member of the last UK generation to have gone to a Grammar School
(11+ anyone?) I'm trying to be more Zen about American 'English' but
it's a struggle. Especially as a huge number of non-English speakers are
learning 'English' from American media content.

As an American, that last bit also concerns me, especially if it is social
media content.

Yeah, that's a big thing that's happening - and a huge can of worms
that doesn't just affect language. (For instance right wing nutters
here in New Zealand wear MAGA caps etc. <shakes head in despair>)

Make Australia Great Again?

LOL, close.

[Bob Latham]

Post by ~misfit~
(For instance right wing nutters here in New Zealand wear MAGA caps
etc. <shakes head in despair>)

Forgive me but why does someone holding a different POV from you make
them a nutter?

For me it is hard not to question the sanity of the the UK left given
that:

They supports Hamas terrorists sympathy marches through London each
weekend calling for the extermination of a race from the river to the
sea. Neither group hiding their racism and anti-semitic hatred of
Jews.

A subset of the above "Queers for Palestine" don't seem to have any
clue what would happen to them were they to visit their beloved
Palestine. Getting thrown off the roof of a building or hanged from a
crane is the normal response. Turkeys voting for christmas.

Our new Energy minister shuts down our North sea oil and gas
exploration in favour of transporting fuels from distant countries at
greater expense and increased CO2 output. In so doing costing
thousands of UK jobs and destroying our energy independence and
supply security. Thinks he can do netzero by 2030.
This is somehow supposed to fix the none existent climate crisis.

One of our new ministers suggests biological men can grow a cervix.

Another tells us that some women have a penis.

Another minister tells us that the definition of a woman depends on
the context.

That is just in the first week of our new wonderful government.

However, I fully understand your deep concern about people wearing
MAGA caps, real nutters you have my sympathy.

Bob.

[petrolcan]

Post by Bob Latham

Post by ~misfit~
(For instance right wing nutters here in New Zealand wear MAGA caps
etc. <shakes head in despair>)

This is somehow supposed to fix the none existent climate crisis.

That line ^^ pretty much invalidates anything else you have written.

And I'm not talking about the spelling.

[Geoff]

Post by petrolcan

Post by Bob Latham

Post by ~misfit~
(For instance right wing nutters here in New Zealand wear MAGA caps
etc. <shakes head in despair>)

This is somehow supposed to fix the none existent climate crisis.

That line ^^ pretty much invalidates anything else you have written.
And I'm not talking about the spelling.

Surely pretty much every line with there misrepresentation, extreme
extrapolations, and conservative bigotry got it before the last line.

geoff

[Bob Latham]

Post by Geoff

Post by petrolcan

Post by Bob Latham

Post by ~misfit~
(For instance right wing nutters here in New Zealand wear MAGA caps
etc. <shakes head in despair>)

This is somehow supposed to fix the none existent climate crisis.

That line ^^ pretty much invalidates anything else you have written.
And I'm not talking about the spelling.

Surely pretty much every line with there misrepresentation, extreme
extrapolations,

You think seeing thousands of terrorist supporters and leftists
acolytes openly racist and calling for genocide of a people is a
misrepresentation? It isn't about the plight of Muslims being killed
by the way, there are many places in the world where Muslims are
being slaughtered in far larger numbers and have been for many, many
years with no protests. Why?

The problem here is simply that it's the Jews and hatred of them,
it's racism. And Jews fighting back after the indescribable horror of
last October that started all this. The Palestinians knew full well
what was being planned, the military tunnels and bases under
hospitals etc. they knew. They are culpable.

Where the west and Israel use arms to protect people, This lot use
people to protect arms.

-

Post by Geoff
and conservative bigotry got it before the last line.

Quoting ministers. Is that that extreme now? OK.

:-)

I am aware of and sympathise with, people who have feelings more
associated with the opposite gender. I hold no malice for them or
anyone and I wish them well. If someone called John asks me to call
him Susan I'm happy to do that but if someone asks me the gender of
the person with a beard and a dress on, I will not deny objective
truth or common sense. Men cannot give birth, Women don't have a
penis.

If KNOWING that for 99.99999999% of the population there are xx and
xy types and no amount of surgery, drugs, lippy and high heels will
change that. Sex is immutable. You are born a sex and you will die
the same sex.

Gender used to be and still is a word that means sex. I recently
applied for a new driving licence and in a pull down menu it asked my
gender. When I saw that, I thought "here we go" but no, to my relief
the UK still has male and female gender licences.

So if that objective truth makes me a bigot, I'm proud to plead very,
very guilty as charged. The left's name calling behaviour has no
effect anymore, we see it for what it is. I only wish I had the word
skills and courage of J.K. Rowling.


As regards the climate, try as I might I cannot find ANY evidence of
a crisis. Once your remove the 'urban heat island effect' what's left
is easily explained by cloud cover and natural cycles plus the odd
natural event like volcanos. Climate change is about politics not
science. Nothing is happening to our climate that hasn't happened
several times in the last 2000 years and to more extreme.

Predictions for all the great and good for 50 years always, always,
ALWAYS, always come to nothing. Even single prediction total nonsense.
Polar bears - fine, great barrier reef absolutely fine.

Repent, repent, the end is nigh!

It's interesting that there is one climate model that isn't producing
absurd predictions and that one is I think Russian but it's secret is
that it understands the saturation of the CO2 heat absorption. It
doesn't see CO2 as the temperature control knob.

The ACC narrative has led to the corruption of science, kids are now
taught that Venus is very hot because it has a 95% CO2 atmosphere and
had runaway greenhouse gas effect.
The level of ignorance to think that is staggering.

The agenda is happy to teach that utter nonsense to innocent children.

Far too many cars, gas boilers and farting cows I suppose.:-)


It is indeed very sad and worrying that supposedly rational people
can demonise CO2 a trace gas 0.04% essential to life. To do so they
ignore history, and rational scientists and common sense.

We now live in the age of endarkenment, Facts don't matter any more
it's only feelings and axiomatic feelings that all "good people"
should have. Burning witches starts soon.

So carry on call me whatever names you like. Don't care I'm done with
bothering about childish name calling.


Bob.

[~misfit~]

Post by petrolcan

Post by Bob Latham

Post by ~misfit~
(For instance right wing nutters here in New Zealand wear MAGA caps
etc. <shakes head in despair>)

This is somehow supposed to fix the none existent climate crisis.

That line ^^ pretty much invalidates anything else you have written.
And I'm not talking about the spelling.

That's a part of the reason that he's in my killfile. I've not seen a post of his (other than
replies to him) for years.

[Bob Latham]

Post by ~misfit~

Post by petrolcan

Post by Bob Latham

Post by ~misfit~
(For instance right wing nutters here in New Zealand wear MAGA caps
etc. <shakes head in despair>)

This is somehow supposed to fix the none existent climate crisis.

That line ^^ pretty much invalidates anything else you have written.
And I'm not talking about the spelling.

That's a part of the reason that he's in my killfile. I've not seen
a post of his (other than replies to him) for years.

:-)

Scared of the truth obviously.

The modern left are bathed in luxury beliefs. Beliefs that only first
world people and a subset of spoilt and privileged people within that
can hold.

They care not for the poor, infact the left, certainly in the UK
despise the working people that gave their "Labour" party its name.
Such is the betrayal.

You can see it for example in netzero where only the privileged
demand this knowing that proportionally it is the poor that will pay
for their ridiculous wet dream fantasy.

Leftists only work well in echo chambers where their nonsense is
reinforced and never challenged.

Bob.

[Dumas Walker]

Post by Bob Latham
A subset of the above "Queers for Palestine" don't seem to have any
clue what would happen to them were they to visit their beloved
Palestine. Getting thrown off the roof of a building or hanged from a
crane is the normal response. Turkeys voting for christmas.

Some people get so caught up in being politically correct (or just feeling
like they are in the right) that they don't think things through.

Post by Bob Latham
Our new Energy minister shuts down our North sea oil and gas
exploration in favour of transporting fuels from distant countries at
greater expense and increased CO2 output. In so doing costing
thousands of UK jobs and destroying our energy independence and
supply security. Thinks he can do netzero by 2030.

Making fuels too expensive is one way to force people to stop using them.
Not a good way, but it is a way.


* SLMR 2.1a * ....we came in?

[~misfit~]

Post by Geoff

Post by ~misfit~

Post by Mark
[ Well off-topic... ]
As someone who has spent some years studying Spanish (with some
reasonable French from my schooldays) I'll offer a /small/ crumb of
comfort in defence of English...

As a member of the last UK generation to have gone to a Grammar School (11+ anyone?) I'm trying
to be more Zen about American 'English' but it's a struggle. Especially as a huge number of
non-English speakers are learning 'English' from American media content.
I get that France was instrumental in them winning their war of independence (and giving them a
bloody great big statue to remind them of the fact) so I understand why they pronounce 'filet' as
they do. But then they end 'tourniquet' with a hard T? Seriously. And don't get me started on
'solder'! It's not like they can't pronounce 'colder' of 'folder'...

Hey man, get over it already !

LOL, I'm trying...

Post by Geoff
geoff
PS - Yes, it needs a twitch in the time-space continuum.

[Yazoo]

On Thu, 11 Jul 2024 15:51:01 +1200, ~misfit~
<***@gmail.com> wrote:

...

Post by ~misfit~
As a member of the last UK generation to have gone to a Grammar School (11+ anyone?) I'm trying to
be more Zen about American 'English' but it's a struggle. Especially as a huge number of
non-English speakers are learning 'English' from American media content.

This is the curse of being dominant language worldwide.

English has been global language for decades now, with dominant impact
from American sources (movies, music, IT industry). So, all English
purists have to live with it :)
I can understand British people to be upset with other idioms of
English language, but it is what it is.

As non-native English speaker, I always wanted to speak it properly.
Some other people use broken English (aka. Tarzan English) and don't
care about what someone thinks about it. :)

[Dave Garrett]

In article <v6nkr5$29rdi$***@dont-email.me>, ***@gmail.com
says...

Post by ~misfit~
International pronunciation is very interesting. I've been watching the Moto GP and hear some
English people struggle with 'Jorge'. They mostly /try/ to get it right though - unlike the
Italians I've heard say the name. They don't even try and just say 'Yorg'.

I'll admit that the BT Sport/TNT Sports talking heads are marginally
better now when it comes to pronouncing Jorge Martin's name on MotoGP
broadcasts, but there was plenty of room for improvement before Jorge
Lorenzo retired in 2019. Back then you could always count on hearing
"WHORE-GAY" innumerable times.

For a real nails-on-chalkboard effort, how about when former
MotoGP/WSB/BSB rider John Hopkins subbed in as a commentator during a
couple of MotoGP races last year and quickly demonstrated that he was
utterly incapable of pronouncing the Italian "gn" digraph, repeatedly
mangling Francesco Bagnaia's last name with a hard "g".

I remain mystified as to how one could hear a name being pronounced one
way, and then say it a completely different way, but what do I know, I'm
a Texan who was once told that I spoke German with a Czech accent.

[Yazoo]

Post by Dave Garrett
I remain mystified as to how one could hear a name being pronounced one
way, and then say it a completely different way, but what do I know, I'm
a Texan who was once told that I spoke German with a Czech accent.

I red somewhere that this ability/inability is connected with music
talent. So, some people really don't recognize the differences, and
have hard time learning foreign language, let alone to get rid of bad
accent.
And some are just lazy. Just because.

[Mark]

Post by Yazoo

Post by Dave Garrett
I remain mystified as to how one could hear a name being pronounced one
way, and then say it a completely different way, but what do I know, I'm
a Texan who was once told that I spoke German with a Czech accent.

I red somewhere that this ability/inability is connected with music
talent. So, some people really don't recognize the differences, and
have hard time learning foreign language, let alone to get rid of bad
accent.
And some are just lazy. Just because.

The bottom line is that we have a whole mix of languages (and I'll
speak of western europe, that I know the names best in) that share a
common alphabet...but not the same pronunciation of either the
individual vowels/consonants or digraphs, and many languages having
silent letters where the rules change from language to language.

I come from an Irish family (we're the first born outside of Ireland) so
I grew up with both English and Irish spoken. I know the rules for
Irish pronunciation, so I understand why phonetically Seán is pronounced
"shawn" or Tadgh is pronounced "tie" with a hard "g" at the end. And
while some of these have entered into common use (with or without
anglicisation), you get into problems with names like "Caitlin" which is
commonly pronounced "kate-lynn" but is nothing like that in Ireland as
it is pronounced "kotch-leen" in the west where my family comes from,
and something closer to "kaht-leen" in other dialects.

The fact the letters look the same fool us into thinking we know how to
pronounce the words. One of the hardest parts of learning Spanish has
been to learn the pronunciation and stress rules. It's critical when you
have esta, está and ésta which many English speakers would say
identically (but be confused as to the accent) but mean different
things:

- esta - feminine "this" - "esta camisa es tuya" - *this* shirt is yours.
- está - he/she/it is - "mi coche está aquí" - my car *is* here.
- ésta - feminine "this one" - "ésta es tuya" - *this* *one* is yours.
(The last one is not really used any more unless it's to avoid confusion
where there is ambiguity).

[Yazoo]

Post by Mark
The fact the letters look the same fool us into thinking we know how to
pronounce the words.

Well, southern Slavic languages such as Croatian (my native), Serbian,
Bosnian, Montenegrian are much simpler in that regard: the main rule
is "read as it is written", letter by letter. So everything is written
fonetically.
The main complication with those languages is very complicated grammar
and word forms with lots of prefixes, sufixes, etc.

Aactually all those languages are almost the same with more than 90%
common words and rules, so we can understand each other normally. Only
politicians and nationalists insist on differences (Serbian is not
Croatian and vice versa).

[Yazoo]

On Fri, 19 Jul 2024 12:03:53 +0200, Yazoo <***@myself.com> wrote:


I wrote "fonetically" instead of "phonetically". So, pun intended!

Post by Yazoo

Post by Mark
The fact the letters look the same fool us into thinking we know how to
pronounce the words.

Well, southern Slavic languages such as Croatian (my native), Serbian,
Bosnian, Montenegrian are much simpler in that regard: the main rule
is "read as it is written", letter by letter. So everything is written
fonetically.
The main complication with those languages is very complicated grammar
and word forms with lots of prefixes, sufixes, etc.
Aactually all those languages are almost the same with more than 90%
common words and rules, so we can understand each other normally. Only
politicians and nationalists insist on differences (Serbian is not
Croatian and vice versa).

[~misfit~]

Post by Yazoo
I wrote "fonetically" instead of "phonetically". So, pun intended!

:)

[Mark]

Post by Yazoo

Post by Mark
The fact the letters look the same fool us into thinking we know how to
pronounce the words.

Well, southern Slavic languages such as Croatian (my native), Serbian,
Bosnian, Montenegrian are much simpler in that regard: the main rule
is "read as it is written", letter by letter. So everything is written
fonetically.
The main complication with those languages is very complicated grammar
and word forms with lots of prefixes, sufixes, etc.
Aactually all those languages are almost the same with more than 90%
common words and rules, so we can understand each other normally. Only
politicians and nationalists insist on differences (Serbian is not
Croatian and vice versa).

We can all agree that English isn't phonetic. Even allowing for regional
variations, it shows the thousand years of development and evolution in
all of its variants.

But take Irish (as that's one I'm familiar with). That's essentially
phonetic even though it sounds very different based on which region your
spoken dialect comes from[1]. The complicating factors for an English
speaker include the rules on slender and broad pronunciation (too
complicated to explain right now) which add additional characters to
resolve (meaning there are often unspoken vowels included) and
digraphs (like mh and bh[2] which are pronounced as "w" when broad, "v"
when slender) that don't exist in English.

Take Siobhán. If you try to pronounce all of the letters according to
English pronunciation rules, you'll come up with something like
see-o-barn (the bh doesn't really exist in English...but that is nowhere
near the right pronunciation...yet it really is phonetically spelt in
Irish.

How? Well, the "S" becomes "sh" when before a slender vowel (e or i).
The "io" has a number of rules depending on the following consonent, but
is normally "i". "bh" is "v" when slender. The "a" is broad and, coming
ahead of the "n", pronounced "or". There you have it:

Siobhán = sh+i+v+or+n = shivorn

Ta-da!

1 Irish was almost killed off by the British, but survived in small
pockets of native speakers. That has led to there being some
significant differences between Standard Irish (defined to support
Irish language use in Ireland generally) and the versions that have
been spoken natively throughout in Connacht (especially in Mayo and
Galway), Munster (Cork and Kerry) and Ulster (Donegal).
2 In the traditional Irish writing, these were (amongst others) wholly
different letters to m and h, but had a "dot" (the "séimhiú") above
them. That's not very common in languages, so one of the many changes
to Irish orthography was to eliminate the accent and instead use "mh"
(also "bh", "ch", "dh", "fh", "gh", "ph", "sh", "th") to make typing
easier.

[Phil Carmody]

Post by Yazoo

Post by Mark
The fact the letters look the same fool us into thinking we know how to
pronounce the words.

Well, southern Slavic languages such as Croatian (my native), Serbian,
Bosnian, Montenegrian are much simpler in that regard: the main rule
is "read as it is written", letter by letter. So everything is written
fonetically.

Oi!

Check what newsgroup you're posting to; here we spell that "f1tically"!

Phil

[Yazoo]

Post by Phil Carmody

... So everything is written
fonetically.

Oi!
Check what newsgroup you're posting to; here we spell that "f1tically"!
Phil

Yes! :)
Good point!

[Phil Carmody]

Post by Mark
1. Consider the "-ough" situation - and I realise this isn't helpful in
through - ough = oo
thorough - ough = uh
bough - ough = ow
dough - ough = oh
cough - ough = off
rough - ough = uff
ought - ough = or

lough - ough = ok (the Irish equivalent of loch, lake)

Phil

[Mark]

Post by Phil Carmody

Post by Mark
1. Consider the "-ough" situation - and I realise this isn't helpful in
through - ough = oo
thorough - ough = uh
bough - ough = ow
dough - ough = oh
cough - ough = off
rough - ough = uff
ought - ough = or

lough - ough = ok (the Irish equivalent of loch, lake)

Yes - should have spotted that. I'm not sure "ok" does it justice. I'm
also sure there are still more uses of "ough" we've missed. Crazy
language!

[Mark Jackson]

Post by Yazoo
The only importan thing is that we understand each other, right? :)

An alternative view:

Loading Image...