Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 13:15:44 -0500 From: Malcolm <arpicnopsammail.com> Subject: Re: 1985 2 door turbo aero silver
On Wed, 26 Mar 2003 14:23:04 GMT, Paul Halliday <pjghnopsamyonder.co.uk> wrote: >in article b5scen$2bmmlb$1nopsam52899.news.dfncis.de, Grunff at >grunffnopsam.com wrote on 26/03/2003 14:09: Paul expounds: >What do they call "gas" (as in the gas, rather than petrol) over that side >of the pond, anyway? Hmmm, it's as confusing as "fries" and "chips". Don't you mean "crisps" versus "chips"?????? Or "chips:" v. "fries" Until recently fully addressed as "french fries" but now are refered to as"FREEDOM FRIES" "Gas" oir gasoline is possibly a more sensible term .One might consider it, etymolgically, to me a volatile fraction or derivative, even a dimitnutive Whereas "petrol" is simply a contraction of petroleum which is "somethi.ng produced from rocks". While on this subject, can you explain :"boot", "bonnet" or "wing"? "Trunk", "hood" and "fender" are more easily seen to derive from the parts function. And, ,why do Brits, and some others, insist on "labour" when the latin from which it directly translates is "LABOR" as in:" labor omnia vincit" , a really dubious attitude. Or, in spelling "center" (which is an older English form) "centre". Is this a French pretension? How can one take a nation seriously when they eat their food out of yesterday's newspaper. We reserve that for garbage or trash. Take your pick. Malcolm
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
