I've got the kids reading Chronicles of Narnia. In the Magician's Nephew, there is reference to "The Wood between the Worlds."
Both Theo and Sasha said, "Why is it not 'woods'?"
Rather than respond that it was another typical cross-pondism for which there could never be a rational answer, it occurred to me to ask what those of you in the eastern islands think? Why do you say "wood" rather than "woods"? And when you read Frost's poem, Stopping by the Woods on a Snowy Evening, does it jar your ear, so to speak?
TEd
I recognise and use both forms. Frost comes to mind, as does TEddy Bear's Picnic! I guess I would say wood to indicate a limited growth, whereas woods suggest a more unbounded spread of forests - perhaps a series of woodland areas bisected by roads or similar. I'll be interested in others' take on this - I sometimes forget how much my lex has been modified by exposure to American language.
In Winnie the Pooh, Owl's house was called "The Chestnuts" -- "an old-world residence of great charm" -- and was located in the middle of the Hundred Acre Wood a/k/a/ Hundred Akre Wood.
I use and recognise both. I think I agree with Mav that there is some sort of relation to scale - if boundary is clearly visible, it's singular, if it stretches away, it's not.
More or less, anyway. When I was a kid, there was a small wood on the other side of the railway track called 'Sooty Woods'. I see nothing wrong with that sentence!!!! And Birnham Wood is singular despite being bigger (or so I assume) than my nostalgic little home patch.
What do you US'ns make of 'can't see the wood for the trees', then? In Bringlish (can I call it that?), it clearly means 'can't see the overall picture for the detail'. Do you say 'can't see the woods for the trees' or what?!?
...and as for the Australians calling it bush when their trees are higher than the ones I grew up with...
>and as for the Australians calling it bush when their trees are higher than the ones I grew up with..
But that's par for the course with Prisoners of Mother England, surely? After all, Poms call things "mountains" that would barely rate as hills here in NZ, with the UK's highest point being a slight bump about 6 inches above sea level, if I remember correctly. Given that, it's hardly surprising that your sense of scale is out of whack. As an aside, would people please stop posting things that make me defend the schlubs on the wrong side of the Tasman?
>What do you US'ns make of 'can't see the wood for the trees'
I think we mostly say "can't see the forest for the trees"... or is it "can't see the trees for the forest"?
in either case, woods don't (wood doesn't?) enter into the equation (no reference to math/maths intended). : )
On Wheel of Fortune (U.S. game show on TV) a couple of weeks ago, the clue read something like: _an't see the _ _ _est _ _ _ the trees. The one contestant who had amassed a large pile of winnings on that round said he was ready to solve it. He proceeded to blurt out: "Can't see the forest through the trees"! [/dai gression] (Hi, sweet maverick!)
My familiarity with the singular term describing an area covered in growing trees is borne of the Hundred Acre Wood and other British lit. It is always used in the plural around here, no matter how big or small the area is. Well, except if the area is small enough, it isn't called "woods," it's called "those trees over there."
SWEET SIXTEEN
Poms call things "mountains" that would barely rate as hills here in NZ, with the UK's highest point being a slight bump about 6 inches above sea level, if I remember correctly.
Exactly. One of my colleagues said that he was off on a mountaineering course in Wales the other week and I asked if they'd imported some specially. Not well received but, hey, you have to try, don't you?
As for wood/woods I recognise both but we call forested areas "the bush" in the Zild too, and I don't think I would have ever used either of them when I was there.
forested areas Are there some, then?
Are there some, then?
I thought the Maaori chopped them all down to make their flutes and pipe organs.
>I thought the Maaori chopped them all down to make their flutes and pipe organs.
Don't forget the zzxjoanws.
Huh? Heh--I thought maybe all the sheep and lambs had eaten 'em all...
Making Pfranz the occasional goat of the joke??
the zzxjoanws
I thought they was the flutes.
In reply to:
the zzxjoanws
I thought they was the flutes.
Nope, they are alleged to be drums. The flutes are real, as here:
http://www.inza.co.nz/RN/RN_Instrument4.html.
Man. Gotta get a copy editor to clear out that JDM® and fix up the errors.
“The Wood between the Worlds”
I may be looking at this too simplistically, but if I recall correctly from my own childhood reading of the Narnia books, the passage between the two worlds was a wardrobe: one opened the front door, pushed through the clothes, and came to the back of the wardrobe, which was the door to Narnia. So, what is the back of a wardrobe made of? Wood, of course: “the wood between the worlds.”
Just a guess as to an alternative meaning –
Though apparently written out of order, the book that describes the formation of Narnia is The Magician's Nephew; while it is the second book that is entitled The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, though I think it was the first published.
The Wood is quite an important part of the first book.
The Wood between the Worlds was an actual wood in "The Magician's Nephew". It had pools between the trees which were the portals to different worlds. Digby compared the wood to the attics of the row of terraced houses he and Polly lived in. I believe that Lewis was experimenting with different metaphysical transportation concepts when he wrote this book which was the first one he wrote, considerably before "The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe". Note the use of the yellow rings as another means of getting from Earth to Charn; he was a friend of Tolkien's at the time that Tolkien was writing "Lord of the Rings" and could easily have decided to use the same device. I believe that he read from "The Magician's Nephew" at the meetings of the informal literary society that Tolkien, Lewis and several others formed in Oxford.
Although I haven't read the book for twenty years or so, I do remember the sinister verse associated with the bell which Digory rings to waken Jadis:
"Heed thee well, impetuous stranger.
Strike the bell and bide the danger
Or wonder till it drives you mad
What would have followed if you had."
I could have some of the words wrong, but I've remembered this since I was ten years old or so, so it clearly made an impression!
"The Magician's Nephew" was completely different in its approach to the rest of the "Narnia" series (as TEd will be finding out anew, reading them with his kids). In some ways it was almost not part of the series; rather a precursor, exploratory novel in much the same way that "The Hobbit" was to "Lord of the Rings".
I much enjoyed these books as a kid, and when I read the series again, back to back, some twenty years ago I found that I enjoyed them quite as much again on one level, but I also realised that the good/evil dichotomy was perhaps too pronounced for adults to swallow whole.
the good/evil dichotomy was perhaps too pronounced for adults to swallow whole. My first time reading any of them was when my daughter was of the age to, and I agree. I'm also glad to know that I'm not the only one who goes back to childhood favorites occasionally.
Ha! Well, I've been quietly buying Arthur Ransom's books (the "Swallows and Amazons" series and their follow-ons) over the past year or so, one here, one there, and re-reading those as well. Ransom was something of a R F Delderfield for kids - bucolic romps around England before the nastiness of the modern world intruded too noticeably.
Incidentally, if you're into sci fi and haven't already encountered them, I can thoroughly recommend reading anything you can lay your hands on by Alastair Reynolds. He's taken over Stephen Baxter's mantle as top UK sci fi writer. Baxter has got lost in quick money-making and trite rubbish. But I still think his "Titan" is the quintessential alternate history space novel ...
"Or wonder until driven mad
What would have happened if you had"
That's the way I remember the last two lines; they were almost my mantra when suffering from OCD. I think you've got the first line wrong somehow, but I can't remember what it was exactly.
The Magician's Nephew was quite obviously written after The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe. Towards the end of it Lewis remarks that the apple tree Digory planted in his back yard provided the wood (there's that word again) from which the wardrobe was built. Though I suppose that proves nothing; Tolkien went back and revised bits of the Hobbit so it would prefigure the Lord of the Rings so I suppose Lewis might have done the same thing in his work.
Anyway, "wood" has always meant a substance to me, and "woods" a place. I think Pooh et al. lived near the Hundred AKER Wood.
Actually, Narnia got it right. I had to. I couldn't help myself!!!
Make your choice, adventurous Stranger;
Strike the bell and bide the danger;
Or wonder, till it drives you mad,
What would have followed if you had.
You looked that up! Try relying on twenty-year-old memory ...
Bite your tongue, CK--we've seen what happens when he does that!
We say "Can't see the forest for the trees". I use both "wood" and "woods", if I use the word at all.
When I think about how I think about groups of trees, I would think of a "wood" or a "woods" as fairly small - say 100 acres. A forest is bigger and older, and wilder. Here in Northern Ontario we refer to "the bush". So I live on 160 acres, mostly bush, with about 10 acres cleared. The bush is made up of conifers and deciduous trees (and tamarack, which is both a conifer and deciduous). The trees are quite large, and the undergrowth tangly, although this is not a requirement!
The phrase "sugar bush" refers to a stand of sugar maples which are tapped for syrup in the spring (which we are doing right now). It's never a "sugar wood" or "sugar woods" or "sugar forest".
"Actually, Narnia got it right."
Sheesh. I just now got it. In reference to my original post, here's a dictum I memorized and never obey: "It's better to remain silent and appear a fool than to speak and leave no doubt."
"Two roads diverged in a yellow WOOD
and sorry I could not travel both
and be one traveler, long I stood,
and looked down one just as far as I could"
k