OneGuyFromBarlick

"They are doing their best with their limited intelligence."

I long ago put myself in that category -

Tripps wrote:Well if you insist. . .

Great list. Keep saving them.

PanBiker wrote:Glep, to look or observe, where does that come from?

Sorry never heard that word. Neither has my trusty Cassell's slang dictionary.

new to me as well.....

Not known to me.

Here is another new word for me. Boris Johnson appeared before the foreign affairs select committee on Thursday. When questioned about the Commonwealth flag he replied: "You are testing my vexillography." LINK

Sally uses glep regularly, she's a village girl but only from 9 miles down the road in Carleton, she says she got if from her mother who again was relatively local being born in Skipton, her relations though were from Westmorland (when it existed).

Another from Sally's mum:

Doy, a term of endearment this one is recognised by Collins.

Doy

Does anyone recognise 'lisk'?

The phrase "I'll make no bones about it" went through my mind this morning. Where does that come from, I wonder?

At first sight I thought we had done this previously, but I can't find it, or remember what it meant. Perhaps we didn't? I'm failing fast.

Anyway this make no bones seems quite credible.

I've a bone to pick with you. Meaning something bad. Could this be the same origin?

I agree with you David about that explanation.
China, I've always thought that 'picking a bone' was self evident. Getting someone to pay more attention to something by examining it more closely. Rather like picking the remaining meat off a bone.
Whilst I accept David's explanation I have to take issue with bones in soup! You can make good stock from bones and if you're poor they can be a cheap source of high quality nutrition.

I like the explanation in Tripps's link, that makes sense. (I also enjoyed the joke at the end: "Waiter, I'll have a crocodile sandwich, and make it snappy".) And I agree with Stanley on the picking of bones.

The place where people on Outdoor Relief from the workhouse knapped stone for the road has always been known as 'Poor Bones'.

I noticed a mistake in usage on R4 this morning, the use of 'Scotch' in reference to a person. 'Scotch is only used for inanimate objects such as beef or whisky. The correct usage for a person is 'Scots'. It must be very confusing for a foreigner learning the language!

I was watching a programme on TV about volcanoes last night. The presenter said that huge lava flows decimated all in their path. Wrong I'm afraid, they destroyed everything not just 10%!

Thank you Stanley, I thought I was the only pedant around.

For 'pedant' read accurate speaker! Someone has to try to maintain standards Julie....

My views have changed on this subject and I now agree with Oliver Kamm that usage is more important than the outdated rules and adherence to old Latin and Greek meanings that Michael Gove so loves. In the modern world decimate is widely used to mean drastically reduce in number or quantity. Even my 16-year-old Collins dictionary gives the first meaning as `to destroy a large proportion of something'. How often would we ever use the word if we restricted it to the Roman one-in-ten definition?

In some circumstances I would agree but this was a description of the effects of a lava flow. By its very nature this causes complete destruction, even the scenery changes! Of course language evolves but I think it is a good thing to give it some anchors by fighting for accuracy. Another example that annoys me is the common usage of 'slag' heaps for spoil tips. Evolution is one thing but accuracy is another. Think of the chaos in a laboratory if people played fast and loose with definitions......

Stanley wrote:In some circumstances I would agree but this was a description of the effects of a lava flow. By its very nature this causes complete destruction, even the scenery changes!

But the word long ago began to be used to mean complete destruction. I wouldn't have used it in the case of the lava flow but users of the English language around the world would use it thus, and those listening would know what they meant by it. We're not Roman centurions, we adapt words for modern world usage.

Stanley wrote:Of course language evolves but I think it is a good thing to give it some anchors by fighting for accuracy. Another example that annoys me is the common usage of 'slag' heaps for spoil tips. Evolution is one thing but accuracy is another. Think of the chaos in a laboratory if people played fast and loose with definitions......

It's important to use the accurate term when technical people are communicating. I would like all other people to use accurate terms but they don't. As far as the common man is concerned a spoil heap is a slag heap. That's what he and his mates have always called it and they all know what they mean. Michael Gove and his fellow authoritarians don't care about the common man, they want everybody to do what they say...Imagine having Gove as your teacher!

Don't compare me with Gove Tiz. I see a measure of pedantry and accurate usage as a useful brake on what could otherwise be an uncontrolled slide. That's why I like using archaic words. There are modern usages I like as well, go figure.....

On tv when discussing air polution they generally show cooling tower emission, what pollution is there in steam ?

I've put an answer to Bodger's question on the Climate Change topic here: LINK

I haven't looked at Tiz's response yet but you are right Bodge. To a layman (or woman!) who has no knowledge of the technology, anything coming out of a factory or large plant is pollution! Idle and misleading reporting.....