. - Wordsmith.org

Max, I lurve it!

I use mine for getting the fuzz off this Kiwi, so where's the joke?

Like, man, ditto.

Humph!

A little shaver told that one to me.

Monthly, the agency which I work for, sends out nutritional information to our clients. This months flyer is all about Vitamin C and how to get the proper amount in your diet. One of the suggestions was, "Try a new source of Vitamin C. Eat a Kiwi."

I don't get enough Vitamin C in my diet. Max? Cap K? Can you help me?

nutritional information

There are numerous signs in my doctor's office admonishing me to Eat Healthy. I would like to know what Healthy is. Does it have a pleasant taste? Does it come in a box? Can I buy it at my local independent grocer's shop?

I use mine for getting the fuzz off this Kiwi
Oh, Max, you're always warm and fuzzy to me!

I've never met a Kiwi I didn't love.

Dear Rapunzel,

One of my pets peeves (and a dying dog, this pet is) is the lack of difference made between healthful and healthy. I NEVER hear anyone anymore use healthful. It drives me CRAZY! Everytime I hear someone say, "Oh, such-and-such product is healthy," I just want to run my fingers down the old blackboard and shriek!

But I'm an old dog and my bark is pretty weak,
DeadDog

Whaaaaaa? I would say it's gone completely the other way. I never heard "healthful" until I started reading USn magazines as a teenager, and therefore attributed this ugly word to them. (Now the Canadian magazines seem to use it, too.) All my life until that point, stuff was "healthy".

Well, Bean, would you then also prefer that helpful become helpy?

"Oh, thank you, that's very helpy!" can I get another long "Whaaaaaaa" from you?

Well, Bean, would you then also prefer that helpful become helpy? [emphasis added]

It's the become part of your statement that I disagree with. It never became "healthy" here, it always was "healthy" and "healthful" is new to me. BTW, the "healthy food" or "healthy vegetables" usage is in my Canadian dictionary, so it's not just that I personally have been using it "wrong" all my life!

Besides, I think we've all gotten the gist from this Board that "wrong" is relative. After all, I do have a Driver's Licence*, not License!

...we've all gotten the gist from this Board that "wrong" is relative. After all, I do have a Driver's Licence*, not License!

Any connection at all between that license and licentious?
Atomica :
1.Lacking moral discipline or ignoring legal restraint, especially in sexual conduct.
2. Having no regard for accepted rules or standards.
I once heard there have been some naughty goings on in some cars!

2. Having no regard for accepted rules or standards.

This is the province where drivers are likely to
(a) back up on a major street
(b) stop randomly to let a car in which is having trouble getting off a side street onto the main road
(c) stop randomly if a pedestrian even looks like they're thinking about crossing the street (causing great screeching of tires behind them)
(d) wave other cars through continuously at a four-way stop sign, without regard to right-of-way; or, alternatively, not stop at all, viewing the stop sign as merely a suggestion

So, I think definition (2) applies.

Regarding licentious: They say if you go up to Signal Hill at night (where some licentiouness apparently takes place), the city lights spell out "SEX". I haven't checked this one out personally.

My roommate and I have included "helpy" in our internal lexicon for about the past three years... it's convenient to have a goofy shorthand when you spend wa-a-a-a-a-ay too much time with someone!

BTW, the opposite of "helpy" is "shmelpy" ~ an obvious extension of a la Max "Help, shmelp".

would you then also prefer that helpful become helpy?

Or that hapful become happy?

wow's cross thread query ("I once heard there have been some naughty goings on in some cars!") prompts this cross thread response.

http://wordsmith.org/board/showflat.pl?Cat=&Board=wordplay&Number=54981

Always glad to be the vehicle to be of service to a lady.

T'other staters that relocate permanently to Western Australia have to sit a written test to get a WA license. 20 questions, multiple choice, 17 or better to pass.

Most of 'em don't get more than 19. Why? - they blow the one "In what circumstance must you stop at a pedestrian crossing?" Have a go yourself, the possible answers are:

(a) Always, even if there are no pedestrians crossing.
(b) Only if you are in danger of colliding with a pedestrian that is crossing.
(c) When a pedestrian is about to step onto the crossing, no matter what side of the street they are on.
(d) Whenever there is a pedestrian on the crossing.

The correct answer is b!!!! I don't walk across roads any more - it's safer to go by car!

stales

Nope - Godstrewf. (Well it was the case when I last asked - haven't read the handbook for years).

What they're trying to say is that pedestrians have priority on a crossing. If there are no pedestrians, or if they're on the opposite side of the crossing, motorists should proceed (with caution). In NSW the rule is (was? Hev?) that as soon as a pedestrian sets foot on the crossing all traffic has to stop. I think the WA police figured this was over zealous if applied to a wide crossing. Once the basic idea was translated into police english it remained technically correct but, as you say, horrific.

stales

When I was a teenager everything spelled SEX.

Now it's just most things

most things spell SEX.

Everything's either concave or convex,
So whatever you see will be *something with sex.

If there are no pedestrians, or if they're on the opposite side of the crossing, motorists should proceed (with caution).

I believe the rule is similar in Ontario - drivers must stop when pedestrians are on the same half of the road, but drivers can proceed with care if pedestrians are still/already on the other lane

wow, so we new yorker's have been doing it right all along!

I looked at "10 things you should know about driving in the UK" today. It says, sensibly, that if a pedestrian crossing is not controlled by traffic lights, that pedestrians have the right of way. I am, however, a bit concerned about the 'usually' in the following: There will be a signpost on the left hand side of the road before a roundabout showing you which way to go. The main route will again (usually) be signposted on the actual roundabout. Also--what is a carriageway and what is a motorway, please? Apparently, carriageways can be "duel" (sic).

pedestrians have the right of way

hah, not in London they don't. Drivers, especially the cabs and buses, are ferocious there. Their philosophy is more like "I'll go ahead and hit him. It'll teach him a lesson." My friend who's been studying at the Notre Dame branch campus in London since January said that one of the guys in his program has already been injured by a car hitting him. While I was there someone got killed by a bus. But I guess it's probably this way for any huge city.

And speaking of traffic, have there been any infrastructural studies done that conclude whether traffic circles or 4 way stops are better? I'm well aware of the occasional annoyance of 4 way stops, but it seems like roundabouts are such an indirect path.

In NSW the rule is (was? Hev?) that as soon as a pedestrian sets foot on the crossing all traffic has to stop.

Geez, stales, make me go LIU why dontcha?

That IS my understanding too, however I did go LIU and the book is *so* vague as to be adaptable to any given situation. (Must add in that I only scanned it for info on pedestrians - it's a 149 page document.) This I *love:

"Pedestrians have some rights to share the road. You must always give way to pedestrians if there is any chance of colliding with them." Page 125 from http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/licensing/ruhjun01.pdf

Uh, where's ron?

Hev

Also--what is a carriageway and what is a motorway, please? Apparently, carriageways can be "duel" (sic).

Ha ha! The duels are not likely to be on a dual carriageway...

carriageway n : (Brit) one of the two sides of a motorway where traffic travels in one direction only usually in two or three lanes

and

motorway n : a broad highway designed for high-speed traffic [syn: expressway, freeway, pike, state highway, superhighway, throughway, thruway]

both from www.dictionary.com

HTH

Hev

HTH
It did. Merci. "Carriageway"--what an utterly quaint name!
Invokes a picture which I am sure is at complete odds with present-day reality, esp. given JazzO.'s frightening statements.

Invokes a picture which I am sure is at complete odds with present-day reality, esp. given JazzO.'s frightening statements.

I think a carriageway is reserved for what would, in the US, be called a highway. The motorway that I travelled on from Gatwick Airport (about 45 minutes south of London) to London itself seemed nowhere near as developed as freeways in the US. Major freeways here require the clearing of about a 50m wide area so there's room for at least 2 lanes on each side and a media large enough for future expansion. The one in England that I experienced twisted right through towns and had normal connections to smaller roads that condensed 2 lanes of traffic into a roundabout. It was nothing so complex as, but seem rather inefficient compared to the huge "4-leaf clover" on-ramp/off-ramp contructions in the US. But I don't have any experience with any other Brit motorways like the ones CK described.

The careless driving I was referring to was strictly in downtown London where virtually the only vehicles are cabs and buses. I love the Tube When I went to Bath and Winchester, the drivers were much more civil.

Nah Jazzo - it's what Hev said.....

To my mind, a "carriageway" is not a highway per se - though it may be part of a highway. A dual carriageway is two separate roads carrying traffic in opposite directions.

IMHO, "motorway" is synonymous with "highway", "freeway" & "expressway" - ie, the sum total of all the carriageways.

stales