HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: david@postman.gr.osf.org (David George)
Subject: Re: What time is "half seven"?
Organization: OSF RI Grenoble
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 10:44:03 GMT

In article <1992Nov04.163021.24701@bas-a.bcc.ac.uk>, skaamjm@ucl.ac.uk (Matthew Moore) writes:
|> 'halb seben' ist ein halb stunde bevor seben uhr
|> 
|> nicht sehr komplicatisch?
|> 
|> 
|> (uhr = o'clock, stunde = an hour, sehr = very)
|> the grammar might not be spot on,

Or even close, better leave the Germlish out of S.C.B. and get back to those
adult education classes Mathew !

David.
Xref: sparky soc.culture.british:15151 alt.folklore.urban:27422
From: mmh@cs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,alt.folklore.urban
Subject: Re: An astonishing Guy
Keywords: Roman Catholic; Constitution
Date: 5 Nov 92 13:04:52 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Dept, QMW, University of London, UK.

From: rgep@emu.pmms.cam.ac.uk (Richard Pinch)
>I am unaware of any law that prevents a Roman Catholic from becoming
>Prime Minister.  All such religious disabilities for MPs were repealed in
>the 19th century.  It is quite impossible for any such law to have
>been passed in the 17th century, since the office of prime minister
>only emerged in the C18.

There was until recently a law which prevented Catholics from
being Lord Chancellor (roughly Minister for Justice) since this
office is one that existed a long time back. The only reason it
remained on the statute books is that no-one got around to
repealing it. It was repealed in a general tidying up of
out-of-date legislation a few years ago, and was commented upon
only because one of the people whose names were being suggested
as next Lord Chancellor was a Catholic and it was thought
this was done to clear the way for him (in the end he didn't
get the job anyway). "Lord Chancellor" shouldn't be confused
with "Chancellor of the Exchequer" (roughly Minister for
Finance).

Presumably this is the cause of the confusion.

Matthew Huntbach
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: scarfman@wam.umd.edu (Jonathan Smith)
Subject: UK telnet help
Summary: Info request
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 16:55:33 GMT

	Can you British users give me a +j+ address which
I can use to telnet to an address with a serial port?  I
have used Guest Telnet in London [+j+00004001018057] but 
it will not accept addresses such as xxx.xxx.xxx.xx yyyy.
[The rejection of the 'y' part of the address is the problem]
	I have tried [+j+000012600600] but it isn't
available 24hours...

	Thanks for your help.  Please respond to me by e-mail
at either:
	scarfman@wam.umd.edu
or 	fo2042@seqa.bris.ac.uk
-------------------------------------------------------------
From Jonathan H. Smith       ||  Clinton/Gore - Victory 1992!
At the University of Maryland||------------------------------ 
in College Park		     ||  
			     || Now Residing in England
"What color is your scarf?"  || 
-------------------------------------------------------------

Xref: sparky soc.culture.british:15205 alt.folklore.urban:27495
From: zeus@vxcrna.cern.ch
Subject: Re: Accent and Dialect, the politics there
Organization: CERN European Lab for Particle Physics
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 01:53:16 GMT

> True, but Scots is not a particularly good language in this respect - not
> different enough from English, for one thing. I take your point that there
> is more opportunity for someone in Scotland to be _actively_ bilingual in
> Scots and/or Gaelic, but that is the sort of thinking that gets English
> children learning Bengali and Urdu (not that I have anything against these
> languages, I just think French and German are far more important).

Given that there are close cultural ties between Britain and India and that
there are an awful lot more Indians than French or Germans I would consider
Bengali and Urdu as equaly important. It is true that other languages may
be rather more useful, but then again just what is the point in learning
some bods language if you can't have a game of cricket with them afterwards?

I always thought that Tebbit chappie had the right line when he said you could
tell the true Brit from the people that they cheer at cricket matches. Pity
nobody told the bounder that you were meant to cheer the play and not the
team, but they let some real low grade riff raff in the Tory party these
days. Anyway if a chap can cheer a good pitch sending middle stump a good
crack then as far as I'm concerned they are a Brit or as good as.

As for speaking Scottish, same case goes as for French. After all the chief
reason for their national game is to sell the maximum number of clubs and
other sporting paraphenalia to gullible Englishmen in the home counties.
Somehow one cannot imagine the baird spending his days tramping the moors
with what would appear to be his own personal dyno-rod kit. He was rather
a frugal type. If rather prone to sarcastic dities on the wonderful nature
of offal stuffed in a sheeps stomach. You can well imagine him giving the
wife a right earfull on the lines of "not haggis again... you know hoe
much I SOOO enjoy it". He would probably be laughing his head off if he
knew what the efffect was going to be.

It seems somewhat pointless to create unneeded barriers to comunication by
seeking to resurect dead languages in the hope of fostering some form
of national identity. It is as pointless as resurrecting old English to
teach Beowulf. Fine as a technical exercise but precious little use.
And before people start leaping up and down complaining about the loss of
"their" cultural herritage, poetry and language isn't national property.
A German or Spaniard has as much right to read Burns as a Scott. If the
Scotts find that Burns is no longer relevant to their culture it will
only be because they have found another icon to identify with. Its fine
for people to identify themselves with national symbols, but forcing them
on others is wrong. It seems to imply that by identifying with an icon
one gains the right to ram it down the throats of others just beacuse they
happened to be born in the same locality. It's that sort of thinking thats
rather too popular in Iran at present.
 

Phill Hallam-Baker
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: jac54@cas.org ()
Subject: Re: Why Berwick-upon-Tweed?
Organization: Chemical Abstracts Service, Columbus, Ohio
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 12:06:58 GMT

In article <NIKOLAY.92Nov9214111@husc10.harvard.edu> nikolay@husc10.harvard.edu (Philip Nikolayev) writes:
>I found the following passage in George III's proclamation
>of October 30, 1776, for a general fast in connection with
>his planned suppression of the American Revolution:
>
>       ...That a public fast and humiliation be observed
>       throughout the part of our Kingdom of Great Britain
>       called England, our dominion of Wales, and town of
>       Berwick upon Tweed, upon the Friday the 13th of
>       December next, that so both we and out people may
>       humble ourselves before Almighty God,.....etc.
>
>My question is, what is so special about Berwick-upon-Tweed?
>Why is it mentioned separately?

	Berrrrrrrick-upon-Tweed (don't pronounce the "w") is on the
	border between Scotland and England and there was a great deal
	of toing-and-froing about whether it was in one or the other.
	As long as its status was not clear, it was specifically
	included in proclamations.

	Berwick was still specifically mentioned in the declaration
	of what was to become the Crimean War, several decades later.
	It was accidentally omitted from the peace treaty so it is still
	at war with Imperial Russia.

	I'm still not sure which country it's in.  I think that it is
	in England but that Berwick Rangers play in the Scottish League
	2nd division.

	Alec.
From: mmh@cs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Just Wondering ??
Date: 10 Nov 92 09:54:05 GMT
Distribution: soc.culture.british
Organization: Computer Science Dept, QMW, University of London, UK.

From: ruairi@sy.ssl.fujitsu.co.jp (Ruairi.H)
>       I was reading my local newspaper (reasonably reliable) today on
>my way to work and it claimed that Sony now employs more people in
>Wales than British Coal.  Anyone care to comment on the accuracy or
>otherwise of this statement.

I think there is only one British Coal pit left operating in
South Wales, and even that is threatened, so your statement may
well be true.

Matthew Huntbach
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: gdb15@grebe.cl.cam.ac.uk (Guy Barry)
Subject: Re: Why Berwick-upon-Tweed?
Reply-To: gdb15@cl.cam.ac.uk (Guy Barry)
Organization: U of Cambridge Computer Lab, UK
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 09:09:21 GMT

In article <1dneqiINNplh@fido.asd.sgi.com> livesey@solntze.wpd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey) writes:

>As a child I was told that the Crimean War was declared on
>behalf of Queen Victoria including her title concerning
>Berwick, but that the peace was signed without mentioning
>the place, so that they still considered themselves to be
>at war with Russia.
>
>However, I have relatives on both side of the border, and
>they used to say the most amazing things about one another,
>so I wrote this off as yet another of these "they're all
>crazy up/down there" things.
>
>Does anyone have the true dope?   Maybe Yeltsin and John
>Major can finally lay this one to rest.

I believe this is true.  I read once that the war didn't officially
end until the 1960's, when a Soviet official made a special goodwill
visit to Berwick to declare peace.




--
Guy Barry, University of Cambridge | Phone: +44 (0)223 334757 
Computer Laboratory                | Fax: +44 (0)223 334678
New Museums Site, Pembroke Street  | JANET: Guy.Barry@uk.ac.cam.cl 
Cambridge CB2 3QG, England, UK     | Internet: Guy.Barry@cl.cam.ac.uk 
Xref: sparky soc.culture.british:15214 alt.folklore.urban:27510
From: livesey@solntze.wpd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,alt.folklore.urban
Subject: Re: Britain doesn't have a Constitution (Re: An astonishing Guy)
Date: 6 Nov 92 06:02:01 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.  Mountain View, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: solntze.wpd.sgi.com


In article <lfjeeeINN91q@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM>, linden@positive.Eng.Sun.COM writes:
> From: streater@unixjr.SLAC.Stanford.EDU (Tim Streater)
> > There *is* an English Bill of Rights ...
> > It forms part of the written part of the Constitution.
> 
> A Constitution and a Bill of Rights by definition cannot be 
> mere laws passed by the standard legislative process.

That's fine.   They were imposed in William and Mary
after the Revolution.   Passing the Bill through 
Parliament was just the paperwork.

jon.
From: wilcox@vax.oxford.ac.uk
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Private Uni's
Date: 7 Nov 92 15:06:44 GMT
Organization: Oxford University VAX 6620

In article <CC.92Nov6141908@arran.dcs.ed.ac.uk>, cc@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Chris Cooke) writes:
>    Oxford and Cambridge are NOT the *only* ones founded centuries ago.
> 
>    Durham, Bath, Bristol to name but 3 English ones. As for other British
>    then how about St Andrews, Glasgow and Edinburgh?
> 
> The University of Edinburgh is 409 years old, and (I seem to remember that)
> it's the youngest of the four old Scottish Universities of St. Andrews,
> Edinburgh, Aberdeen and Glasgow.

And the University of Oxford came into existence around 750 years ago. Its only
*serious* competition comes from the European continent, despite what a certain
New University in Fenland would have you believe.
-- 

Stephen Wilcox             |   For Sale: Posts in British Government. Suit
wilcox@vax.oxford.ac.uk    |   outgoing American. Highest bids accepted.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,soc.culture.canada
From: userDHAL@ucs.UAlberta.CA (David Halliwell)
Subject: Re: In your school?
Organization: University Of Alberta, Edmonton Canada
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 22:14:14 GMT

godfrey@sscvx1.ssc.gov (LAURENCE GODFREY) writes:

>In article <dhalliwe.721084546@muskwa.ucs.ualberta.ca>, userDHAL@mts.ucs.UAlberta.CA (David Halli writes...
>> 
>>   I definitely do not think that Laurence Godfrey's attitudes and
>>opinions (or capabilities, I presume) are representative of the british
>>in general. Our department here has several brits that like it here (and
>>are liked). We also just hired another one away from Cambridge, who will
>>be a definite plus.
>> 

>Well he's obviously not a definite plus right now, or he wouldn't be leaving
>a prestigious place like cambridge (I assume you mean the university) for
>a god-forsaken dump in the frozen wilderness of Alberta, now would he?
>I mean, Dave, lets face it Alberta is not exactly a centre of academic
>excellence, now is it?

   Not having worked at Cambridge, I can't comment about personalities
there. Obviously, the person in question has decided that U of Alberta
offers greater potential in terms of interaction with collegues, funding
etc. I'll concede to his judgement that U of A is an improvement over the
environment he worked in at Cambridge.


Dave Halliwell
Department of Geography
University of Alberta
Edmonton, Alberta
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,alt.folklore.urban
From: rhadden@isdres.er.usgs.gov
Subject: RE: Can the Prime Minster be Catholic?
Organization: U.S. Geological Survey
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 13:10:18 GMT

We are all Cathoic. some of us just aren't roman.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: sp@osf.org (Simon Patience)
Subject: Re: question on cost of living in UK
Organization: Open Software Foundation
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 11:05:25 GMT

In article <40670@sdcc12.ucsd.edu>, aejones@sdcc13.ucsd.edu (Amanda Banana Farts ) writes:
                                                                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^
> I am planning on studying in London next year, and would like to
> know, realistically, what I can expect to spend.  I would be
> interested in renting a room in an apartment, nothing fancy, but in
> central London.  

And well ventilated presumably.

Simon.

-- 
  Simon Patience
  Open Software Foundation			Phone: +33-76-63-48-72
  Research Institute				FAX:   +33-76-51-05-32
  2 Avenue De Vignate				Email: sp@gr.osf.org
  38610 Gieres, France				       uunet!gr.osf.org!sp
Xref: sparky soc.culture.british:15153 soc.culture.canada:8264
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,soc.culture.canada
From: migod@turing.toronto.edu (Mike Godfrey)
Subject: Re: In your school?
Organization: CSRI, University of Toronto
Date: 5 Nov 92 13:46:36 GMT

In article <5NOV199203010964@sscvx1.ssc.gov> godfrey@sscvx1.ssc.gov (LAURENCE GODFREY) writes:
>>>So Canada stands twice condemned - it has to hire mediocre
>>>Brits and it does so because it can't produce anything less mediocre itself.
>> 
>>And occasionally Canada realizes its mistakes and refuses grants to
>>particularly mediocre Brits.
>
>As I've told you on at least one occasion, I have NOT been refused a grant
>by Canada (I don't know where you got this idea from).  I repeat, I had 
>a dispute with your laughable National Research Council who employed me
>and quit my job with them in 1987.  Check if you wish.

Now why on earth would you think I was referring to you?
Hit a nerve, have I?

-- 
Mike Godfrey                                "I came so far for beauty,
Dept of Comp Sci, UofT                       I left so much behind."
migod@turing.toronto.edu                                -- Leonard Cohen
From: jac54@cas.org
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Just a quick question
Date: 6 Nov 92 20:52:22 GMT
Article-I.D.: cas.1992Nov6.205222.8235
Organization: Chemical Abstracts Service, Columbus, Ohio

In article <1992Nov6.155635.6990@dcs.qmw.ac.uk> mmh@cs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach) writes:
>From: rsthomas@nyx.cs.du.edu (Rich Thomas)
>
>>Could someone tell me (email please) the definition of
>>a common-law marriage in England? Thanks.
>
>The phrase is used so often that many people believe there is a
>legal definition. There is not. If you are living with someone
>as man and wife, but don't have a marriage certificate then if
>you die without a will your partner gets nothing. Same applies
>to any other rules where marriage brings you some benefit. On
>the other hands if it causes you to lose out (liability for
>poll tax, entitlement to social security) any form of
>cohabiting is treated as marriage. There's tales of social
>security official measuring temperatures of beds with
>thermometers to find if two people have been sleeping there and
>thus can't claim welfare as their combind earnings are too
>high.
>

	My understanding is that Scots Law is different and in their
	is something called "marriage by habit and repute" which is
	a common law marriage.  Anybody care to expand or dismiss?

	Alec.
Xref: sparky soc.culture.british:15676 alt.folklore.urban:28149
From: chem91@Elroy.UH.EDU ("Bill Harrison (713)-743-2789")
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,alt.folklore.urban
Subject: Re: Anglican vs C of E
Date: 11 Nov 92 15:37:49 GMT
Reply-To: chem91@Elroy.UH.EDU
Organization: University of Houston

>> > There is a good
>> > argument for having _some_ religious representation in the government, and
>> > unless you pick the single blandest, most neutral and moderate group, where
                                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> > do you stop?  Earth Goddess worshippers?  David Icke?
                                               ^^^^^^^^^^ who?
>> 
>> Would you like to explain what that is, because I can't even think of a
>> feeble excuse, let alone a good argument.
>
>Because people want it?
>
>jon		(By the way, I'm an atheist.)


Pat Robertson is very, very far from being "bland, neutral and moderate". 
I've never known a "neutral" religious organization, in fact... When religion
and politics mix the result is always ugly... 

Bill
+ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\               /~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~+
| Bill Harrison,            \             /       "Be as radical as... |
| University of Houston, TX  >-----------<         reality itself"     |
| CHEM91@JETSON.BITNET      /             \                V. I. Lenin |
+ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~/               \~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~+
From: wilcox@vax.oxford.ac.uk
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Request for Oxford Poly's E-mail Address
Date: 6 Nov 92 20:20:06 GMT
Organization: Oxford University VAX 6620

In article <1992Nov4.091336.19051@pierrot.comlab.ox.ac.uk>, Geraint.Jones@comlab.oxford.ac.uk (Geraint Jones) writes:
> proberts@informix.com (Paul Roberts) asks:
> ( Isn't it true that they have designated all the Polytechnics in Britain
>  )to be "Universities"? If so, what has Oxford Poly become? "Oxford University"?
> ( "University of Oxford"? "The Other Oxford University"? Just curious ....
> 
> I think it's not approved yet, because they took so long to come up with it,
> but the proposal is Oxford Brookes University.  John H. Brookes was (er um, /
> um...) principal of the predecessor institution of the Poly, which must    /
> have been a college of some other sort.  Something like that.             / g

And according to a report in this week's Times Higher Ed. Supplement, Oxford
citizens have already started to call it Oxford B University, in comparison
with the A-grade university down the hill.
-- 

Stephen Wilcox             |   For Sale: Posts in British Government. Suit
wilcox@vax.oxford.ac.uk    |   outgoing American. Highest bids accepted.
From: mmh@cs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: An astonishing Guy
Date: 11 Nov 92 10:43:33 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Dept, QMW, University of London, UK.

From: matthew@uk.tele.nokia.fi (Matthew Faupel)
>In article <BxHx96.4Ln@newcastle.ac.uk> Trevor.Kirby@newcastle.ac.uk (Trevor
Kirby) writes:
>> The right of habeous corpus was passed because the adjudicators counted a
>> really fat lord as ten votes.
>
>Maybe I've missed something, but I always thought that Habeus Corpus was a
>law enacted to prevent people being tried for murder when there was no body
>of the deceased to prove that murder was indeed done...  What's this got to
>do with fat lords and adjudicators?

There is a story that when the Bill for Habeas Corpus was going
through Parliament, as a joke the people who count the votes
("tellers" not "adjudicators") counted some MP (I think it was
in the Commons, not the Lords) as ten votes as he was very fat.
But in the excitement of the close vote, no-one remembered to
rectify the situation, so the Bill got through (with a majority
less than 10) when really it shouldn't.

Matthew Huntbach
Xref: sparky soc.culture.british:15615 alt.folklore.urban:28059
From: livesey@solntze.wpd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,alt.folklore.urban
Subject: Re: Anglican vs C of E
Date: 10 Nov 1992 23:33:32 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.  Mountain View, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: solntze.wpd.sgi.com


In article <1992Nov10.100309.16253@osf.org>, sp@osf.org writes:
> In article <A.Grant.23.721334628@ucs.cam.ac.uk>, A.Grant@ucs.cam.ac.uk (Alasdair Grant) writes:
> > There is a good
> > argument for having _some_ religious representation in the government, and
> > unless you pick the single blandest, most neutral and moderate group, where
> > do you stop?  Earth Goddess worshippers?  David Icke?
> 
> Would you like to explain what that is, because I can't even think of a
> feeble excuse, let alone a good argument.

Because people want it?

jon		(By the way, I'm an atheist.)
From: dwilkins@maths.tcd.ie (David Wilkins)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Private Uni's
Date: 9 Nov 92 12:05:35 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Maths, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland.

In article <1dek3uINN7jo@fido.asd.sgi.com> livesey@solntze.wpd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey) writes:
>In article <27812@castle.ed.ac.uk>, matt@castle.ed.ac.uk writes:
>> Oxford and Cambridge are NOT the *only* ones founded centuries ago.
>> 
>> Durham, Bath, Bristol to name but 3 English ones. As for other British
>> then how about St Andrews, Glasgow and Edinburgh?
>
>I don't know about the rest, but I think Durham is a Henry VIII
>foundation.   Trouble is, it was founded as a theological college
>and then re-founded in the nineteenth century as a regular
>University.

I don't recall Henry VIII having anything to do with it.

I seem to remember there was an abortive attempt to found a
university in the middle ages.  Cromwell also started to
found one, but it did not get off the ground.

The existing university was founded round about the 1820s,
at a time when the issue of `excessive' Church endowments,
and their abuse, was a political hot potato.  At that time
Durham was one of the richest dioceses in the country, and
I presume that the diocese decided that, if their lands
were likely to be taken away from them anyway, they might
as well use part of their wealth to found a university.
The oldest college is University College, in Durham Castle,
opposite the cathedral.  Before this, the castle was the
official residence of the Prince Bishops of Durham.
(The current bishop's palace is in Bishop Auckland, about
ten miles away from Durham City.)  The other `old' colleges
are accomodated in what were Georgian private houses on
the peninsula.

DRW