In article >,
says...
>
> In article ocal>,
> "J. Clarke" > wrote:
>
> > In article >,
> > says...
> > >
> > > On 2/13/2011 4:22 PM, Lenona wrote:
> > > > Found this.
> > > >
> > > > Lenona.
> > > >
> > > > http://lifestyle.msn.com/relationshi...entid=27656377
> > > >
> > > > Dear Miss Manners,
> > > > Who should get the check? My question is in regards to the etiquette
> > > > of getting the check at the end of the meal. I was raised that if it
> > > > was not made very clear at the beginning (such as "don't worry we are
> > > > taking you out"), to always make an effort to pay. My parents taught
> > > > me it is polite to put up a little "argument over it," and I have
> > > > always tried to do this when I have the opportunity; whether it is
> > > > simply paying for myself or picking up the entire check.
> > > >
> > > > My husband believes if you are out with someone a little more well off
> > > > you should simply take their offer, no argument.
> > > >
> > > > I feel like this is rude, but my problem is that I am just out of
> > > > college and recently married. I can't necessarily follow through with
> > > > the "argument" if I win. We see our parents on a pretty regular basis,
> > > > and so tend to eat out with them frequently. The informality of these
> > > > dinners means that no one specifies who pays for whom. Should dinners
> > > > like these be understood as just dutch, or is it okay to simply accept
> > > > as soon as they reach for the bill?
> > > >
> > > > Gentle Reader,
> > > > Your husband's theory that those with more money should subsidize the
> > > > entertaining of those with less is doomed. Miss Manners promises you
> > > > that eventually, the perpetual hosts will feel that they are valued
> > > > only for their ability to pick up the bill.
> > > >
> > > > Yes, sometimes even parents. The long habit of paying for their
> > > > children often remains; many parents prefer to continue to do so and
> > > > will make sure they win any such polite arguments as you mention. But
> > > > even they will be flattered if you occasionally make a point of
> > > > issuing a clear invitation at which you are the hosts -- at a place
> > > > that you can afford.
> > >
> > > It seems to me that is the dinner/lunch is suggested in the following
> > > manner it is dutch - "How about getting together for lunch on Tuesday?"
> > > or "Would you like to go out for dinner next Saturday?" or something
> > > like that.
> > >
> > > But if you say "I'd like to take you out to dinner on Friday." or if
> > > someone sayst that to you, that means the person doing the inviting is
> > > paying.
> > >
> > > If you do go on a supposed "dutch" either party may decide that they
> > > want to pay for the other and say, "That's okay, I'll get the check."
> > > or something to that effect.
> > >
> > > I think that's very straight forward. Just because one person
> > > "suggests" the meal doesn't mean they are offering to pay. It's when
> > > they say "Let me take you to dinner." that they are offering to pay.
> >
> > This is far, far too subtle a distinction of wording IMO.
> >
> > Could you provide a comprehensive list of code words that indicate an
> > offer to treat or no offer to treat?
>
> When the server takes the order, "Separate checks, please."
You've missed the point of my inquiry. If one is supposed to glean from
"I'd like to take you" vs "would you like to go out" that in the one
case the person making the inquiry is offering to pay while in the other
one is offering Dutch, then I would like to know all the other code
words involved in such an inquiry so that I don't fail to communicate.