|
Posted to rec.food.cooking
|
|
|
Bad news - cilantro
"Bruce" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 18:47:00 -0700, "taxed and spent"
> > wrote:
>
>>
>>"sf" > wrote in message
. ..
>>> On Sat, 01 Aug 2015 19:02:57 -0500, "cshenk" > wrote:
>>>
>>>> sf wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>>>>
>>>> > On Sat, 01 Aug 2015 16:35:02 -0600, Janet B >
>>>> > wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > > On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 20:09:32 +0100, "Ophelia"
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > wrote:
>>>> > >
>>>> > > >"S Viemeister" > wrote in message
>>>> > > > ...
>>>> > > >> On 8/1/2015 2:11 PM, Janet B wrote:
>>>> > > >>> On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 17:29:53 +0100, Janet >
>>>> > > wrote:
>>>> > > > > >
>>>> > > >>>> In article >,
>>>> > > says...
>>>> > > > > > > >
>>>> > > >>>>> sf wrote:
>>>> > > > > > > > >
>>>> > > >>>>>> The Brits don't prescribe to that.
>>>> > > > > > > >
>>>> > > >>>>> Those barbarians! ;-D
>>>> > > > > > >
>>>> > > >>>> At least we know how not to use "prescribe "
>>>> > > > > > >
>>>> > > >>>> Janet UK
>>>> > > >>> perhaps 'ascribe'?
>>>> > > >>> Janet US
>>>> > > > > >
>>>> > > >> Subscribe.
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > 
>>>> > > I don't know. Look back at the original statement. I am unsure of
>>>> > > ascribe vs. subscribe.
>>>> > > Janet US
>>>> >
>>>> > No. Prescribe as in prescription. A blind following of their subset
>>>> > of rules.
>>>>
>>>> Ascribe in American english is the right one for the meaning. Means to
>>>> 'follow a path'. Subscribe in US english indicates a stronger
>>>> affiliation to the point on no other view allowed.
>>>>
>>>> Grin, subscribe is more a shoot to kill level term than was intended.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I meant prescribe as in prescribed rules. Janet needs to educate
>>> herself before she gets snotty with me.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> sf
>>
>>The first thing I do when I think someone has used the wrong word is to
>>look
>>it up. sf is correct in her usage.
>
> Link or it didn't happen.
>
> --
> Bruce
nobody linked to where she was wrong, so I guess that didn't happen either.
|