HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gibbons@chdasic.sps.mot.com (Alan Gibbons)
Subject: Re: O-levels, A-levels etc was Re: THE COM
Reply-To: gibbons@chdasic.sps.mot.com
Organization: Motorola ASIC Division
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 15:04:16 GMT


>In article <92253.160556EE117@LIVERPOOL.AC.UK>, EE117@LIVERPOOL.AC.UK writes:
>> 
>> Large quibble here:
>> 
>> The main qualification for admittance to Oxbridge seems to be the existance of
>> immensely wealthy parents who, ideally, are also titled. Exactly how many S
>> levels have the Windsors [*] managed to scrape together - probably a similar
>> amount to John Major's O level tally, viz nil.
>> 
>Even larger quibble here:
>
>Well if you count Rev & Mrs, I suppose my parents are titled. But immensely 
>wealthy: do you know how much clergymen and teachers earn? What the Windsors or
>the Chancellor's daughter did is irrelevant to the overwhelming majority of
>Oxbridge students. What *is* important is brains and application, as it is for
>any university.
>
>> and another thing...
>> 
>> given the amount of Oxbridge Old Boys in the Conservative Party (citizen Major
>> apart) and the incredible academic esteem attributed to these institutions
>> why is the Country in such a complete shambles
>What do you expect with a Conservative government? Economic success? Full
>employment? Good public health services? Good public education? Their education
>is irrelevant: if they had good policies the country would not be in a mess.
> 
>> -Ian (8 Os, 4 As,admitted to Sheffield Uni. on the strength of my UCCA form)
>Do I detect a disgruntlement at being turned down by another University?
>
>Stephen (not one to boast, but since you ask 14 Os, 5 As and 3 Ss, admitted to
>Oxford University on the strength of UCCA form, interview and exam results.)

The UK only has one problem - OXBRIDGE "graduates" - THEY are the
Conservative party, the Labor party and any other party you care to
mention - put genuinely well qualified people in power who KNOW what
they are doing and who have a genuine interest in the country (and not in
each other) and you will get rid of the problem.

 - Alan (not one to boast, but since you ask 11 Os, 4 AOs, 5 As and 2 Ss
	and passed all Oxford entrance exams - turned them down and went to a
	real University - Nottingham !)
From: mark@cs.hw.ac.uk (Mark Riordan)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Majors Visit to Scotland
Date: 15 Sep 92 09:08:14 GMT
Organization: Dept of Computing & Electrical Engineering, Heriot-Watt University, Scotland

In article <1992Sep14.214535.26157@cs.hw.ac.uk> neilp@cs.hw.ac.uk (Neil Postlethwaite) writes:
>One thing about non-tory politicians that really annoy me is they claim that
>75% of Scotland voted for devolution/independance. This is utter bullshit.
>75% of the population voted for parties which have as part of their agenda
>proposals for political change.
>

This feels like talking through a loudspeaker but anyway Neil

I do seem to remember Tories claiming after the election that
they had a very succesful election because they didn't suffer
the disaster that had been predicted. This is another example
of a rule of thumb used by ALL politicians never admit to
having had a bad day. I don't therefore think you can discredit
the devloution/independence cause with this accusation.

MARK


-- 
| JANET:    mark@uk.ac.hw.cs   Mark Riordan,                                 |
| Internet: mark@cs.hw.ac.uk   Dept of Computing and Electrical Engineering, |
| (031) 449-5111 x4172         Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, Scotland.  |
From: sandee@Think.COM (Daan Sandee)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: This England
Date: 11 Sep 1992 16:18:45 GMT
Organization: TMC
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: telecaster.think.com

In article <43740@skye.dcs.ed.ac.uk>, morna@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Morna J Findlay) writes:
|> In article <1992Sep11.091611.11680@cs.hw.ac.uk> nick@cs.hw.ac.uk (Nick Taylor) writes:
|>
|> >"Be England what she will, with all her faults, she is my country still"
|> 
  [That was Charles Churchill, 1731-1764 (died young, didn't he?), quite
   possibly a relation.
   But note also :

    "England, with all thy faults, I love thee still -
     My country ! "
                             --- Thomas Cowper, 1731-1800.
   Now who cribbed from whom ?                                    ]

Morna> That sounds just like "My country - right or wrong" .
Morna> Who said that - did anyone?

Further exploration in the CODQ.
 " Our country ! In her intercourse with foreign nations, may she always be
   in the right ; but our country, right or wrong."
                              --- Stephen Decatur, 1779-1820.
   [Decatur was a captain in the US navy in the war of 1812. TERRIBLE
   sentiment, isn't it ; presumably he disapproved of the war, but had
   to explain to himself why he was fighting it.]

|> Morna Findlay 				JANET:morna@uk.ac.ed.dcs 

To your other questions, this thread started with an ad by United (Come See
Britain) in their inflight mag ; and somebody posted the whole speech
only yesterday (but he had it online, which is cheating, I have to type
it all in).

Daan Sandee                                           sandee@think.com
Thinking Machines Corporation
Cambridge, Mass 02142                                 (617) 234-5044
From: nick@cs.hw.ac.uk (Nick Taylor)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: This England
Date: 11 Sep 92 09:16:11 GMT
Organization: Dept of Computing and Electrical Engineering, Heriot-Watt University, Scotland

In article <21780616@otter.hpl.hp.com> mjfm@otter.hpl.hp.com (Miranda Mowbray) writes:
>This is a very good example of how selective quotation can change a passage's
>meaning.  Most of the time when the speech is quoted the quote stops at "this
>England".  This makes the speech appear to say simply that England's Great,
>which is NOT what it says.
>
>Some people deliberately stop at the England's Great place because they think
>it's unpatriotic to talk about England's faults.  Which is nonsense, you
>couldn't get more patriotic than this speech.

Not so much England's faults as Richard II's. Most of the speech is a load of
arrogant clap-trap about England (even Shakespeare doesn't seem to know the
difference between England and "the isle") then it goes on to slag off tricky
Dicky II.

>Yes, Churchill did quote it, in a radio broadcast.  

On the subject of Churchill quotes here's one from Charles Churchill (any
relation?) which I rather like:

"Be England what she will, with all her faults, she is my country still"

What I'd like to know is how an 18th century poet knew Graham Taylor was going
to become the England football manager? Methinks he was a prophet new inspired.

Nick Taylor.
From: cc@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Chris Cooke)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Dum dee dum...
Date: 8 Sep 92 11:27:47 GMT
	<1992Sep3.182008.8644@vax.oxford.ac.uk> <10187@uqcspe.cs.uq.oz.au>
	<1992Sep7.175236.8718@vax.oxford.ac.uk>
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Edinburgh, Scotland
In-reply-to: wilcox@vax.oxford.ac.uk's message of 7 Sep 92 16:52:36 GMT

In article <1992Sep7.175236.8718@vax.oxford.ac.uk> wilcox@vax.oxford.ac.uk writes:

   > Anyone care to hazard a visual description of Mummy Pargitter?
   > 
   How could we? That would be sacrilege!

   Her voice is razor-sharp when it hasn't been dulled by gin, and her
   hearing is exceedingly selective. Her one aim in life is to take up the
   style of living of one of the landed gentry and to put down that stupid
   Archer woman.

I wouldn't want to venture a complete description, but I reckon that Mummy
must be one of those ex-empire ladies who have had a deep brown tan for
years, and consequently are extremely wrinkled round the eyes.  She probably
also has sun-bleached blonde hair, rather short and nicely coiffured of
course.  It'll suddenly go blue-grey overnight one of these days.
--
	-- Chris. 	cc@dcs.ed.ac.uk   (on Janet, cc@uk.ac.ed.dcs)
From: saustin@bbn.com (Steve Austin)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Why are the British portrayed so falsely on TV/Film
Date: 14 Sep 92 17:01:20 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: bbn.com

neilp@cs.hw.ac.uk (Neil Postlethwaite) writes:

->Having watched a few video's over the weekend, one thing with them I find
->is that the British get such a false stereotypical portrayal of them. It
->makes me wonder if the writers have ever been outside their country.

I have noticed that the English are the new "baddie" class in the movies.
It seems like vilfying most of the ethnic categories are too non-PC
for Hollywood to cope with, but the sneering English upper-class, well
placed, evil SOB (still an ethnic class, I suppose) is a safe choice.
One example of this was Hannibal Lechter in Silence of the Lambs --
the film character was very English even though the original
book made no mention of Hannibal the Cannibal's nationality.

	Steve Austin
Xref: sparky soc.culture.british:12399 rec.arts.tv.uk:5412 rec.arts.drwho:6046 alt.usage.english:7338
From: ecsv24@castle.ed.ac.uk (J Bradfield)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,rec.arts.tv.uk,rec.arts.drwho,alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: was GB!!! No smeg, is now: Truly Trivial
Date: 12 Sep 92 19:09:40 GMT
Reply-To: Julian Bradfield <jcb@lfcs.ed.ac.uk>
Organization: Laboratory for Foundations of Computer Science, Edinburgh U

In <1992Sep12.020811.6714@macc.wisc.edu> husted@vms.macc.wisc.edu (Jack) writes:

>In article <1992Sep8.170840.22969@gateway.novell.com>, terry@thisbe.Eng.Sandy.Novell.COM (Terry Lambert) writes...

>IAW Webster's Collegiate (1965 edition), the daughter of 
>a marquess should be addressed the same as a duke's daughter:

Correct.

>The Lady <given name surname>;

Correct: but according to Debrett no definite article is used with
courtesy titles, although the Court Circular seems to do so.

 or The Right Honourable
>[and the u in honorable is there in Webster's Col.] Lady
><given name surname>. 

Wrong. Right Honourable is a title of Barons, Viscounts, Earls, Privy
Counsellors, and a few other miscellaneous offices.
From: reese@vax.oxford.ac.uk
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Oxford research
Date: 14 Sep 92 19:47:17 GMT
Organization: Oxford University VAX 6620

In article <92255.151550JKDESIDE@MIAMIU.BITNET>, JKDESIDE@MIAMIU.BITNET writes:
> Hello.  I was wondering if anyone could help me.  I have just finished my
> third (yet unpublished) novel.  It largely centers around a young man at
> Oxford University from 1906-1907.  I have done extensive research and have
> visited the town of Oxford for a very BRIEF period (five hours).  I know where
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Oh, great.
Why don't you write about something you know?
Max Beerbohm wrote a good novel about the time you specify. Zuleika Dobson.
If English Literature needs anything at the moment it certainly is NOT
another novel about Oxford.

Jason

> the Mitre is situated (how could one not?), but I do not know where the Golden
> Cross is located.  I also have to ask a very humiliating question.  Can one
> "change" colleges at any point during one's career (eg. Magdalen to New
> College)?  Also, does anyone know approx. how long a train ride from London
> to Coventry or from London to Oxford would have taken at the turn of the
> century?  (I know it takes about an hour to from London to Oxford now.)
> I would appreciate any help that anyone could give me regarding this matter.
>  
>                        Thanks ever so much,
>                                       Jennifer

P.S.  If you really need the info I can supply it by email. Just email me.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: tls@brspva.enet.dec.com (Tim Short)
Subject: Re: VNS: Fri  4-Sep-1992
Reply-To: tls@sscvx1.ssc.gov
Organization: Superconducting Supercollider Laboratory
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 09:41:39 GMT

In article <1992Sep8.104252.9209@bristol.ac.uk>, smee@bristol.ac.uk
(Paul Smee) writes:
|>The thing that strikes me as fun is that the Government, to get all
|>this money they want (in pounds, ultimately) is borrowing half of it
|>in
|>Deutschmarks (to be used to buy pounds), and the other half in a
|>mixture of marks, yen, dollars, and presumably whatever else is going
|>(to be used to buy pounds).  I'm sure some economist out there
|>somewhere understands it, but my intuition says that if you want
|>pounds, you should borrow pounds, and that there is something
|>seriously
|>unrealistic or unnatural about an economic system where this
|>cross-currency approach makes sense.
|>
|>(And Lordy, will they be in trouble if they've mis-guessed which way
|>the
|>exchange rates are going to move between now and whenever it's time
|>to
|>pay up, which will need to be done in the currency which was
|>borrowed.)
|>
|>-- 
|>Paul Smee, Computing Service, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 1UD,
|>UK
|> P.Smee@bristol.ac.uk - ..!uunet!uknet!bsmail!p.smee - Tel +44 272
|>303132
|>

This is the whole point of the exercise. By buying pounds in foreign
currency now, the Government hopes to display its confidence that
current exchange rates can be maintained and also to demonstrate its
determination to take all available options in order to do so. Only when
the markets believe this will pressure on sterling be reduced. Whether
it will work or not is a different question.

Interest rates will have to rise - but consider the poor Swedish - their
key interbank rate just went to 75%.





Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: godfrey@sscvx1.ssc.gov (LAURENCE GODFREY)
Subject: Re: Duty on goods brought into the UK
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.4-b1  
Organization: Superconducting Super Collider Laboratory
Distribution: soc
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 18:35:00 GMT

In article <NICKH.92Sep15110806@VOILA.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU>, nickh@CS.CMU.EDU (Nick Haines)            writes...
>Anyone had any experience paying duty on possessions taken into the UK
>after some time abroad? I'm here in the US for another year now, and
>am thinking about buying various items (a computer etc), taking
>advantage of the prices here. I think there are rules covering
>`items essential to livelihood' or some such, which would cover a
>computer for me, but I'm not sure....
> 
>Replies by email please.
> 
>Nick Haines nickh@cmu.edu



If you've arrived from outside the EC you must have owned goods, and used them
for one year or more in order to get exemption from duty and VAT. Special
rules for cars, but essentially the same.  Phone the local British Embassy
and get a leaflet - then read it carefully.  It's not a problem, never has
been for me anyway.

laurence

Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: arpepper@math.uwaterloo.ca (Adrian Pepper)
Subject: Re: SEND US A POST CARD PLSE !!!!
Organization: University of Waterloo Math Faculty Computing Facility, Ontario.
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 22:24:33 GMT

In article <1992Sep4.114852.10588@waikato.ac.nz> amc@waikato.ac.nz writes:
>Hello from New Zealand,
>
>We are Summer and Anna, two post-graduate students who are in an office with
>grotty beige wall paint. We want to cover the walls with postcards from all
>over the place, so feel free to send us a postcard. We would prefer not to 
>receive any nude ones and ask you to be tastefull in your selection.

Oh dear.  Where does one find suitable clothing for postcards, then?

Adrian.
arpepper@math.uwaterloo.ca
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: tls@brspva.enet.dec.com (Tim Short)
Subject: Re: What is a 2.1 equivalent to ?
Reply-To: tls@sscvx1.ssc.gov
Organization: Superconducting Supercollider Laboratory
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 08:40:54 GMT

In article <PLUMMER.92Sep13180928@nutmeg.cs.swarthmore.edu>,
plummer@cs.swarthmore.edu (David Barker-Plummer) writes:

|>   Maybe, but I'd rather mention that I got a pass degree from a decent
|>   university like Hertfordshire than a 1st or 2:1 from a "campus with no
|>   hope" like Keele...

What the hell is the University of Hertfordshire?

I know lots of people who went to Keele. The academic reputation may not
be so hot, but since it's in a big field miles from anywhere with ~equal
mix of gender, they spent all their time shagging. I went to Imperial in
London, which had about 7% women. I got a tremendous degree and am now
an amazingly successful international bastard but I never get laid...so
maybe I should have gone to Keele...
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,rec.arts.tv.uk,rec.arts.drwho,alt.usage.english
From: husted@vms.macc.wisc.edu (Jack)
Subject: Re: was GB!!! No smeg, is now: Truly Trivial
Organization:  University of Wisconsin Academic Computing Center
Distribution:  world
Date: 11 SEP 92 20:49:24    

In article <1992Sep8.170840.22969@gateway.novell.com>, terry@thisbe.Eng.Sandy.Novell.COM (Terry Lambert) writes...

>All right.  Give.  What is the proper term of address?

IAW Webster's Collegiate (1965 edition), the daughter of 
a marquess should be addressed the same as a duke's daughter:
The Lady <given name surname>; or The Right Honourable
[and the u in honorable is there in Webster's Col.] Lady
<given name surname>.  If her husband holds a title of nobility
either by right or courtesy, the wife is ordinarily addressed
according to her husband's title.
The appropriate salutation is either Madam or My Lady. 8-)

Next week, addressing the Pope! 8-D

Be of good Cheer,
Jack
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,rec.arts.tv.uk,rec.arts.drwho,alt.tv.prisoner,alt.usage.english
Subject: Gordon Bennett! Re: No smegma please, we're American
From: husted@vms.macc.wisc.edu (Jack)
Date: 3 SEP 92 15:55:47    
Distribution: world
Organization: University of Wisconsin Academic Computing Center

In article <Bu0JLK.4u0@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk>, jack@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk (Jack Campin) writes...

>husted@vms.macc.wisc.edu (Jack) wrote:
>> bcr@cernapo.cern.ch (Bill Riemers) writes...
>>> ... what in the hell does "smegma" mean?
>> Actually, this is not an unintelligent question asked by someone too lazy
>> to look it up in his own dictionary.  'Smegma' can be found in some
>> dictionaries (e.g. Random House Collegiate) and not in others (e.g.
>> Webster's Collegiate).
> 
>Peeve time.  I've noticed a remarkable correlation among net posters

1st note: Correlation can denote a positive or negative
relationship.  Being precise is important in communicating
in any language, including English, or at least in
American English. 8-)

>between making pig-ignorant statements about English usage and citing

2d note: George Orwell might disagree with the juxtaposition
of the words pig and ignorant.  But, then I wouldn't swear that
G.O. actually did any comparative intelligence studies of farm
animals. 8-)

>the Webster's Collegiate as a source... for a start, it seems to be
>unique among dictionaries in its market niche in *only* citing usages
>from one side of the Atlantic.  This is not a problem with the grown-up

3d note: I assume you mean that it is biased toward American
English.  This seems a curious statement since I find it to
be a reasonable source of obscure (to American speakers)
Scottish words useful primarily for Scrabble and other
such word games.  In fact, the 1927 edition has an entire
section, 17 pages of 4 columns each, devoted to a pronouncing
glossary of Scottish words and phrases in addition to its
*foreign* words and phrases section.  One might even call
Webster's Collegiate the American anglophile's dream.  In
what other dictionary of its size and relative low cost can
you find the proper term of address for the married daughter
of a marquess/marquis? (ref. 1965 edition)  This burning linguistic
issue is probably not among most American college students'
lists of the top ten social problems. 8-) However, Webs. Col. is
deficient in that it doesn't contain an entry for *smegma*.8-D

>Webster or with smaller British dictionaries.  So why do American college
>students go on using this pile of... what's the word...?

4th note: Clearly, it must be smegma. 8-)

Post Script:
From another thread, thanks to all who sent in explanations for
Gordon Bennett!  Any additional etymologies may be sent
directly to:
husted@vms.macc.wisc.edu
Thanks,
Jack Husted
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,sci.lang,alt.usage.english
From: JAREA@UKCC.UKY.EDU
Subject: Re: Problem with 'they' (etc) as 3p singular common gender pron.
    <1992Aug26.224805.12829@dscomsf.desy.de> <10522@spark.ed.ac.uk> 
    <n!mnb5n@lynx.unm.edu>
Organization: University of Kentucky
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 01:52:55 GMT

In article <n!mnb5n@lynx.unm.edu>
jfreter@triton.unm.edu (The Myth) writes:
 
>
>I hope that i have the attribution correct:
>>In article<1992Aug26.224805.12829@dscomsf.desy.de>Hallam@zeus02.desy.de writes:
>>
>>>they put a dyslexic in charge of
>>>writting the dictionary and as a result are unable to spell even simple little
>>>words like colour properly to this very day!
>
>Well, I remember reading in a history text about 6 years ago that the reason
>that Webster dropped the unneeded _u_ in certain words (humor, rumor, color)
>was that the original latin roots of these words sisn't have that _u_.
>
>Does anyone know if this is true?
>
>Jerry
>
 
I haven't checked the truth of your assertion for Webster's reasons, but
it is true that the Latin has <o>, not <ou> for this set of nouns.  It is
_important_ to note three things in this recurring discussion.  First, at
the time Englishmen began to settle in America ("the colonies") spelling
in England was still in flux, and there was no fixed spelling for this set
of items, nor for many others such as theatre vs theater (the latter spelling
having been used in the early editions of Shakespeare's plays, etc.).  Second
the English in England decided (for reasons I shall let them explaing) to
spell some of the (such as 'humour') one way, and others (such as 'author')
a different way -- both variants having been in use for both "sets" of words.
Third, many, but not all, Englishmen, expect that other speakers, or, in this
instance writers, should always follow whatever changes they make in England
in spelling, pronunciation, etc., because they are both ethnocentric and
ignorant of the development of their language and the reasons for variation.
Fortunately, the great number of informed Englishmen (and other informed
speakers of English) are not so insular (!), mistaken, nor arrogant.
It should again be noted that there is a place for this sort of thing under
alt.eng.usage:  alt having all sorts of delightful crannies including alt.
bestiality.hamsters.
 
Xref: sparky soc.culture.british:12250 rec.arts.tv.uk:5305 rec.arts.drwho:5911 alt.tv.prisoner:1328
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,rec.arts.tv.uk,rec.arts.drwho,alt.tv.prisoner
Subject: Re: Americanising of the UK, Now: British TV in North America
From: ace@kryton.UUCP (Catherine Beckstead)
Date: Mon, 07 Sep 92 13:47:04 PDT
Organization: Paradox Alley F&SF BBS 805-492-8789

ewm6965@venus.tamu.edu (The Guardian) writes:
<comments about British children's shows and Count Duckula deleted>

> Of course it's well done--it's a spinoff of Dangermouse, after all.
> 
> "Another failed attempt at round-in-one.  See what I mean, Penfold?  Golf jus
> isn't my game."  -DM

I saw an episode of DM that had a grandfather clock.  Penfold and DM went into
the clock and came out in another time.  "Hey that's just like that thing
that Doctor has!"  says Penfold.  "Doctor Who?" askes DM.  "Exactly", says
Penfold.   <paraphrased a bit, but the general idea of the scene>  :-)

> 
> But the US can answer with Bullwinkle.  Rocky was about to be burned at the 
> stake in one episode, and the following dialogue (or something close to this,
> anyway) ensued...
> 
> Rocky:  You can't burn me at the stake!
> Man:  Who says?
> Rocky:  The networks!  [holds up legal document] See?  No cannibalism.
> Man:  Hoo no, we not going to eat you, we just going to burn you!
> Rocky:  Oh.  Well, I guess that's OK.


-------------------------------------------------------------------
Catherine Beckstead                    ace@kryton.uucp
"Do you want to argue with a can of deodorant that registers
NINE on the Richter scale?"        --Ace, in "Dragonfire"