Bags of walnuts in the shell, I mean.

After all, cherries are far more delicate, you'd think - and yet,
when they're in season, it's easy enough to buy THOSE in good
condition for under $4 a pound, if you shop around!

OK, so you're buying the pits and stems as well, but those make up far
less than 25% of the total weight, I'm guessing. Whereas with walnuts,
the shell is 50% of the weight - and IIRC, you're lucky if you pay as
little as $4 a pound - so that's $8 a pound WITHOUT the shell!

BTW, here's a thread I started in 2012 about WHERE to buy them:

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/rec.food.cooking/walnuts$20lenona/rec.food.cooking/fdypRjPYGT8/sA1HQk8vkS0J

Even so, I'm curious as to the WHY of the matter, this time.

Lenona.

On 8/2/2014 11:30 AM, wrote:
>
> Bags of walnuts in the shell, I mean.
>
> After all, cherries are far more delicate, you'd think - and yet,
> when they're in season, it's easy enough to buy THOSE in good
> condition for under $4 a pound, if you shop around!
>
> OK, so you're buying the pits and stems as well, but those make up far
> less than 25% of the total weight, I'm guessing. Whereas with walnuts,
> the shell is 50% of the weight - and IIRC, you're lucky if you pay as
> little as $4 a pound - so that's $8 a pound WITHOUT the shell!

> Even so, I'm curious as to the WHY of the matter, this time.

If they were having trouble selling them at that price, it would
come down, that's my guess.

nancy

On Sat, 2 Aug 2014 08:30:51 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

>
> Bags of walnuts in the shell, I mean.
>
> After all, cherries are far more delicate, you'd think - and yet,
> when they're in season, it's easy enough to buy THOSE in good
> condition for under $4 a pound, if you shop around!
>
> OK, so you're buying the pits and stems as well, but those make up far
> less than 25% of the total weight, I'm guessing. Whereas with walnuts,
> the shell is 50% of the weight - and IIRC, you're lucky if you pay as
> little as $4 a pound - so that's $8 a pound WITHOUT the shell!
>
> BTW, here's a thread I started in 2012 about WHERE to buy them:
>
> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/rec.food.cooking/walnuts$20lenona/rec.food.cooking/fdypRjPYGT8/sA1HQk8vkS0J
>
> Even so, I'm curious as to the WHY of the matter, this time.
>

I guess it all boils down to supply and demand.
http://www.wga.com/magazine/2014/04/...mall-bump-road

--
I take life with a grain of salt, a slice of lemon and a shot of tequila

Cultivate friendship with someone who has a tree or three, and you will likely be able to pick up
as many as you want. Owners get awfully annoyed by the huge nuts getting all over their driveways
and lawn that needs to be mowed....kinda like pine cones in nuisance value.

N.

"Nancy2" > wrote in message
...
> Cultivate friendship with someone who has a tree or three, and you will
> likely be able to pick up
> as many as you want. Owners get awfully annoyed by the huge nuts getting
> all over their driveways
> and lawn that needs to be mowed....kinda like pine cones in nuisance
> value.
>
> N.

True. We don't have a cherry orchard anymore, but my SIL does have a walnut
orchard so we can easily get walnuts. I am amazed at how high the prices are
now in CA.

Cheri

On Saturday, August 2, 2014 11:58:07 AM UTC-5, Nancy2 wrote:
> Cultivate friendship with someone who has a tree or three, and you will likely be able to pick up
>
> as many as you want. Owners get awfully annoyed by the huge nuts getting all over their driveways
>
> and lawn that needs to be mowed....kinda like pine cones in nuisance value.
>
Around here the squirrels would get every single last one.
>
> N.

--Bryan

On Sat, 02 Aug 2014 11:32:28 -0400, Nancy Young
> wrote:

>On 8/2/2014 11:30 AM, wrote:
>>
>> Bags of walnuts in the shell, I mean.
>>
>> After all, cherries are far more delicate, you'd think - and yet,
>> when they're in season, it's easy enough to buy THOSE in good
>> condition for under $4 a pound, if you shop around!
>>
>> OK, so you're buying the pits and stems as well, but those make up far
>> less than 25% of the total weight, I'm guessing. Whereas with walnuts,
>> the shell is 50% of the weight - and IIRC, you're lucky if you pay as
>> little as $4 a pound - so that's $8 a pound WITHOUT the shell!
>
>> Even so, I'm curious as to the WHY of the matter, this time.
>
>If they were having trouble selling them at that price, it would
>come down, that's my guess.
>
>nancy

Without researhing I'll guess a walnut tree disease. Crop failures
lead to high prices. Limes are expensive now because a disease has
infected the trees. Right now I'm treating my plum trees for black
knot disease.
http://nysipm.cornell.edu/factsheets...ases/bk/bk.asp

Just a simple Google search says that 99% of all the commercial
English walnuts grown in the U.S. are grown in California. California
is in the second or third year of a terrible drought. I suspect that
a further search would turn up statistics about how few will be
produced this year.

On Sat, 2 Aug 2014 08:30:51 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

>
>Bags of walnuts in the shell, I mean.
>
>After all, cherries are far more delicate, you'd think - and yet,
>when they're in season, it's easy enough to buy THOSE in good
>condition for under $4 a pound, if you shop around!
>
>OK, so you're buying the pits and stems as well, but those make up far
>less than 25% of the total weight, I'm guessing. Whereas with walnuts,
>the shell is 50% of the weight - and IIRC, you're lucky if you pay as
>little as $4 a pound - so that's $8 a pound WITHOUT the shell!
>
>BTW, here's a thread I started in 2012 about WHERE to buy them:
>
>https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/rec.food.cooking/walnuts$20lenona/rec.food.cooking/fdypRjPYGT8/sA1HQk8vkS0J
>
>Even so, I'm curious as to the WHY of the matter, this time.
>
>Lenona.

On Saturday, August 2, 2014 8:28:59 PM UTC-5, B. Server wrote:
> Just a simple Google search says that 99% of all the commercial
>
> English walnuts grown in the U.S. are grown in California. California
>
> is in the second or third year of a terrible drought. I suspect that
>
> a further search would turn up statistics about how few will be
>
> produced this year.
>
>
>
> On Sat, 2 Aug 2014 08:30:51 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
>
>
>
> >
>
> >Bags of walnuts in the shell, I mean.
>
> >
>
> >After all, cherries are far more delicate, you'd think - and yet,
>
> >when they're in season, it's easy enough to buy THOSE in good
>
> >condition for under $4 a pound, if you shop around!
>
> >
>
> >OK, so you're buying the pits and stems as well, but those make up far
>
> >less than 25% of the total weight, I'm guessing. Whereas with walnuts,
>
> >the shell is 50% of the weight - and IIRC, you're lucky if you pay as
>
> >little as $4 a pound - so that's $8 a pound WITHOUT the shell!
>
> >
>
> >BTW, here's a thread I started in 2012 about WHERE to buy them:
>
> >
>
> >https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/rec.food.cooking/walnuts$20lenona/rec.food.cooking/fdypRjPYGT8/sA1HQk8vkS0J
>
> >
>
> >Even so, I'm curious as to the WHY of the matter, this time.
>
You are better off avoiding walnuts, as they are super high in omega-6.
http://chriskresser.com/how-much-ome...nds-on-omega-6

Pecans are a much, much better choice. One should only eat walnuts if one
enjoys them a lot. Thinking they are healthful is fallacious.

This dumb**** author doesn't have a clue.
http://healthyeating.sfgate.com/waln...tion-1576.html
For optimum health, one should limit both walnuts and Brazils, while
consuming more of the pecans, almonds and hazelnuts.
>
> >Lenona.

--Bryan

> wrote in message
...
>
> Bags of walnuts in the shell, I mean.
>
> After all, cherries are far more delicate, you'd think - and yet,
> when they're in season, it's easy enough to buy THOSE in good
> condition for under $4 a pound, if you shop around!
>
> OK, so you're buying the pits and stems as well, but those make up far
> less than 25% of the total weight, I'm guessing. Whereas with walnuts,
> the shell is 50% of the weight - and IIRC, you're lucky if you pay as
> little as $4 a pound - so that's $8 a pound WITHOUT the shell!
>
> BTW, here's a thread I started in 2012 about WHERE to buy them:
>
> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/rec.food.cooking/walnuts$20lenona/rec.food.cooking/fdypRjPYGT8/sA1HQk8vkS0J
>
> Even so, I'm curious as to the WHY of the matter, this time.
>
> Lenona.

Nuts in general aren't cheap. I guess it has to do with how much it costs
to grow them. I never have so I don't know how long it takes to produce
them or what the yield is per tree.

"Bryan-TGWWW" > wrote in message
...
> On Saturday, August 2, 2014 8:28:59 PM UTC-5, B. Server wrote:
>> Just a simple Google search says that 99% of all the commercial
>>
>> English walnuts grown in the U.S. are grown in California. California
>>
>> is in the second or third year of a terrible drought. I suspect that
>>
>> a further search would turn up statistics about how few will be
>>
>> produced this year.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, 2 Aug 2014 08:30:51 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >
>>
>> >Bags of walnuts in the shell, I mean.
>>
>> >
>>
>> >After all, cherries are far more delicate, you'd think - and yet,
>>
>> >when they're in season, it's easy enough to buy THOSE in good
>>
>> >condition for under $4 a pound, if you shop around!
>>
>> >
>>
>> >OK, so you're buying the pits and stems as well, but those make up far
>>
>> >less than 25% of the total weight, I'm guessing. Whereas with walnuts,
>>
>> >the shell is 50% of the weight - and IIRC, you're lucky if you pay as
>>
>> >little as $4 a pound - so that's $8 a pound WITHOUT the shell!
>>
>> >
>>
>> >BTW, here's a thread I started in 2012 about WHERE to buy them:
>>
>> >
>>
>> >https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/rec.food.cooking/walnuts$20lenona/rec.food.cooking/fdypRjPYGT8/sA1HQk8vkS0J
>>
>> >
>>
>> >Even so, I'm curious as to the WHY of the matter, this time.
>>
> You are better off avoiding walnuts, as they are super high in omega-6.
> http://chriskresser.com/how-much-ome...nds-on-omega-6
>
> Pecans are a much, much better choice. One should only eat walnuts if one
> enjoys them a lot. Thinking they are healthful is fallacious.
>
> This dumb**** author doesn't have a clue.
> http://healthyeating.sfgate.com/waln...tion-1576.html
> For optimum health, one should limit both walnuts and Brazils, while
> consuming more of the pecans, almonds and hazelnuts.

I can't almonds, pistachios, pecans or macadamias. Shame because I love
them all. I do limit the Brazil nuts because they are high in selenium and
too much of that can cause trouble.

On Sun, 3 Aug 2014 13:16:00 -0700, "Pico Rico" >
wrote:

> the original phrase was "spitten image".

I am quite familiar with that one.


--
Avoid cutting yourself when slicing vegetables by getting someone else to hold them.

On Sunday, August 3, 2014 4:59:48 PM UTC-4, Janet Wilder wrote:
>
> >>>>>
>
> >>>>> the expression is "spit 'n' image".
>
> >>>>
>
> >>>> That's the first time I've ever seen it written that way.
>
> >>>
>
> >>> Me too, it's always "spitting image" here. We even had a TV show called
>
> >>> Spitting Image.
>
> >>>
>
> >>> Janet UK
>
> >>>
>
> >>
>
> >> It evolved
>
> >> Spitting image is the usual modern form of the idiom meaning exact
>
> >> likeness, duplicate, or counterpart. The original phrase was spit and
>
> >> image,
>
> >
>
> > the original phrase was "spitten image".
>
> >
>
> >
>
> My OED (Oxford English Dictionary) has 'spit and image'
>
>
>
> I was an English major, the OED is my bible when it comes to such stuff.

Thank you. I'm not ALWAYS wrong.

I guess it's one of those things like "couldn't care less", and the millennium debate back in 2000. Accept and live with it. I won't even get INTO 'forte'.

"Julie Bove" wrote:
>
>Nuts in general aren't cheap. I guess it has to do with how much it costs
>to grow them. I never have so I don't know how long it takes to produce
>them or what the yield is per tree.

I have several shagbark hickory trees, they are some 50-60 feet tall,
gorgeous trees. I used to check but never found any nuts, just husks
on the ground, squirrels... I was not about to compete with squirrels
climbing trees. Nuts are also very perishable, they contain
substantial oil so go rancid quickly. Nut trees can have more value
as lumber... walnut wood is very expensive. It takes a long time to
grow nut trees, if as a young woman you planted a stand of walnut
trees figure only your grand children would benefit.

From the etymology source I read, really either form is used frequently and is acceptable.
It certainly isn't one of those phrases which can be said to be absolutely correct or incorrect.

N.

Janet, but as you well know, the English language is constantly changing. Not always for the good, I
will admit, but change it does.

N.

On Saturday, August 2, 2014 10:08:36 PM UTC-4, Bryan-TGWWW wrote:

>
> Pecans are a much, much better choice.

So the next question is, why are pecans-in-the-shell even MORE
expensive than walnuts?

Granted, shelling pecans is much more difficult than shelling walnuts -
but again, I wasn't talking about shelled nuts.

Lenona.

On 8/4/2014 8:30 AM, Nancy2 wrote:
> Janet, but as you well know, the English language is constantly changing. Not always for the good, I
> will admit, but change it does.
>
> N.
>


It is, and my OED is not, but it's still my "go to" authority for
language questions. :-)

Can't take the English major out of me.

--
From somewhere very deep in the heart of Texas

On Sunday, August 3, 2014 7:19:08 PM UTC-4, Kalmia wrote:
>
> I won't even get INTO 'forte'.

I learned that from George Carlin.

It was gratifying, later on, to hear Charles Emerson Winchester (on
M*A*S*H) pronouncing the noun correctly. Those writers sure did
their research well - but for all I know, David Ogden Stiers
knew the correct pronunciation anyway.

(For those who don't know, you only pronounce the e when it's an
adjective.)

It's refreshing when comics and cartoonists use intelligence and
simple facts to make things funnier. One Far Side cartoon example:

http://www.jokefile.co.uk/animal_jokes/mosquito.html

SPOILER:

(Part of the joke is that it's only the female mosquitoes that drink
blood - the males drink plant juices.)


Lenona.

On Saturday, August 2, 2014 5:30:51 PM UTC+2, wrote:
> Bags of walnuts in the shell, I mean.
>


Maybe they are heavilly taxed in your region as they are in denmark? nuts and almonds have one of the highest taxes of goods in DK (around 100%), second to cars (180%). Simple sugar and gelatine candies have very little more than the 25% VAT that also vegestables enjoy. But nuts and almonds are apparently horrible snacks for the population.

Then there's the good old supply and demand, which is rapidly changing. An almond grower told that they could sell everything thats produced to china nowadays due to the new wealth there, and they are willing to pay even more.. It is only due to friendly deals from importers in the western world that the producers still sell to those.

Could be a similar status for other nuts.

Wonder how long the importers can keep it up until the prices will explode to fight with these new chinese buyers.

On 2014-08-04 11:21 AM, Michael Nielsen wrote:
> On Saturday, August 2, 2014 5:30:51 PM UTC+2,
> wrote:
>> Bags of walnuts in the shell, I mean.
>>
>
>
> Maybe they are heavilly taxed in your region as they are in denmark?
> nuts and almonds have one of the highest taxes of goods in DK (around
> 100%), second to cars (180%).


I don't think I have ever met a Dane who has not told me about that 180%
sales tax. When I friend picked me up at the airport in Copenhagen in
his new car he said that he had paid for three cars but he only got one.

>
> I don't think I have ever met a Dane who has not told me about that 180%
>
> sales tax. When I friend picked me up at the airport in Copenhagen in
>
> his new car he said that he had paid for three cars but he only got one.

A funnier version of it is when a guy at a conference tour in california talked about the new dodge Challenger HellCat with 6.2liter engine and 700 horse powers , and the list price was 60.000$ he exclamed ( as if thats expensive). and then I said "oh well, I can get a 2 liter Ford Focus or maybe a top model Chevrolet Cruze for that amount!". And he had a funny look on his face.

On Monday, August 4, 2014 10:35:22 AM UTC-4, wrote:
> On Sunday, August 3, 2014 7:19:08 PM UTC-4, Kalmia wrote:
>
> >
>
> > I won't even get INTO 'forte'.
>
>
>
> I learned that from George Carlin.

I learned that from a guy, (from Texas!) who used to beat the pants off me at cribbage.

> It was gratifying, later on, to hear Charles Emerson Winchester (on
>
> M*A*S*H) pronouncing the noun correctly. Those writers sure did
>
> their research well - but for all I know, David Ogden Stiers
>
> knew the correct pronunciation anyway.

Hey, I think I reMEMber that episode.

My high school drama coach tried to drill it into us that the word was 'KrisTian', not Chris-chin. Negotiate was another one of her pet peeves.

> (For those who don't know, you only pronounce the e when it's an
>
> adjective.)

Would you use it adjectivally in a sentence, please?

I bet you cringe at what some of the news-anchors are saying.

On Monday, August 4, 2014 9:30:28 AM UTC-4, Nancy2 wrote:
> Janet, but as you well know, the English language is constantly changing. Not always for the good, I
>
> will admit, but change it does.
>
>
>
> N.

Yeah, like, you know what I mean, like, duh.

"Kalmia" > wrote in message
...
> On Monday, August 4, 2014 9:30:28 AM UTC-4, Nancy2 wrote:
>> Janet, but as you well know, the English language is constantly changing.
>> Not always for the good, I
>>
>> will admit, but change it does.
>>
>>
>>
>> N.
>
> Yeah, like, you know what I mean, like, duh.

irregardless.


if you have any further questions, just ax me.

On 8/3/2014 9:05 PM, Brooklyn1 wrote:

>
> I have several shagbark hickory trees, they are some 50-60 feet tall,
> gorgeous trees. I used to check but never found any nuts, just husks
> on the ground, squirrels... I was not about to compete with squirrels
> climbing trees.

I have a few hickory trees too. On a good year I may be able to collect
a half dozen nuts that fell to the ground. Not worth the effort.

In article >,
"Cheri" > wrote:

> "Nancy2" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Cultivate friendship with someone who has a tree or three, and you will
> > likely be able to pick up
> > as many as you want. Owners get awfully annoyed by the huge nuts getting
> > all over their driveways
> > and lawn that needs to be mowed....kinda like pine cones in nuisance
> > value.
> >
> > N.
>
> True. We don't have a cherry orchard anymore, but my SIL does have a walnut
> orchard so we can easily get walnuts. I am amazed at how high the prices are
> now in CA.
>
> Cheri

haven't heard about the drought or the walnut thieves?

On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 06:30:28 -0700 (PDT), Nancy2
> wrote:

> Janet, but as you well know, the English language is constantly changing. Not always for the good, I
> will admit, but change it does.

Wishing you would quote some context and author. We have 3 Janets who
post and all differentiate which one they are. At first I thought you
were replying to the UK Janet because of the love affair Brits have
with their OED and then I remembered the Texas Janet has one too.

--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.

On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 09:22:47 -0700, "Pico Rico" >
wrote:
>
>
> if you have any further questions, just ax me.
>
Wrong spelling. The correct spelling is "aks".

--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.

"sf" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 06:30:28 -0700 (PDT), Nancy2
> > wrote:
>
>> Janet, but as you well know, the English language is constantly changing.
>> Not always for the good, I
>> will admit, but change it does.
>
> Wishing you would quote some context and author. We have 3 Janets who
> post and all differentiate which one they are. At first I thought you
> were replying to the UK Janet because of the love affair Brits have
> with their OED and then I remembered the Texas Janet has one too.
>

you remember who has what dictionary?

On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 09:09:54 -0700 (PDT), Kalmia
> wrote:

> My high school drama coach tried to drill it into us that the word was 'KrisTian', not Chris-chin. Negotiate was another one of her pet peeves.

Your coach would be wrong. There are two ways to pronounce it and her
way isn't the most common.
http://inogolo.com/pronunciation/Christian
http://www.howjsay.com/index.php?wor...&submit=Submit

There's only one way to pronounce negotiate.
http://www.macmillandictionary.com/u...tish/negotiate
http://www.howjsay.com/index.php?wor...&submit=Submit

Bonus points for: exit

--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.

On Monday, August 4, 2014 4:42:48 PM UTC-4, Pico Rico wrote:
> "sf" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 06:30:28 -0700 (PDT), Nancy2
>
> > > wrote:
>
> >
>
> >> Janet, but as you well know, the English language is constantly changing.
>
> >> Not always for the good, I
>
> >> will admit, but change it does.
>
> >
>
> > Wishing you would quote some context and author. We have 3 Janets who
>
> > post and all differentiate which one they are. At first I thought you
>
> > were replying to the UK Janet because of the love affair Brits have
>
> > with their OED and then I remembered the Texas Janet has one too.
>
> >
>
>
>
> you remember who has what dictionary?

He was shocked that a Murrican owned an OED. : ))

On Monday, August 4, 2014 12:22:47 PM UTC-4, Pico Rico wrote:
> "Kalmia" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > On Monday, August 4, 2014 9:30:28 AM UTC-4, Nancy2 wrote:
>
> >> Janet, but as you well know, the English language is constantly changing.
>
> >> Not always for the good, I
>
> >>
>
> >> will admit, but change it does.
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> N.
>
> >
>
> > Yeah, like, you know what I mean, like, duh.
>
>
>
> irregardless.
>
>
>
>
>
> if you have any further questions, just ax me.


I'll be certain to ast-chu.

Diane Sawyer canNOT say 'asked'. Ever notice? Present tense only.

Tough word: sixths. 'Cut that pizza into sixths.'

On Mon, 4 Aug 2014 14:21:50 -0700 (PDT), Kalmia
> wrote:

> He was shocked that a Murrican owned an OED. : ))

It's "different" so to speak, but considering what she did back in the
day, not terribly surprising.

--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.

"Kalmia" > wrote in message
...
> On Monday, August 4, 2014 10:35:22 AM UTC-4, wrote:
>> On Sunday, August 3, 2014 7:19:08 PM UTC-4, Kalmia wrote:
>>
>> >
>>
>> > I won't even get INTO 'forte'.
>>
>>
>>
>> I learned that from George Carlin.
>
> I learned that from a guy, (from Texas!) who used to beat the pants off me
> at cribbage.
>
>> It was gratifying, later on, to hear Charles Emerson Winchester (on
>>
>> M*A*S*H) pronouncing the noun correctly. Those writers sure did
>>
>> their research well - but for all I know, David Ogden Stiers
>>
>> knew the correct pronunciation anyway.
>
> Hey, I think I reMEMber that episode.
>
> My high school drama coach tried to drill it into us that the word was
> 'KrisTian', not Chris-chin. Negotiate was another one of her pet peeves.

I hate it when people say Crishin. I know of a woman who named her youngest
that and she always pronounced it that way. So did a friend of mine.
>
>> (For those who don't know, you only pronounce the e when it's an
>>
>> adjective.)
>
> Would you use it adjectivally in a sentence, please?
>
> I bet you cringe at what some of the news-anchors are saying.

"Kalmia" > wrote in message
...
> On Monday, August 4, 2014 12:22:47 PM UTC-4, Pico Rico wrote:
>> "Kalmia" > wrote in message
>>
>> ...
>>
>> > On Monday, August 4, 2014 9:30:28 AM UTC-4, Nancy2 wrote:
>>
>> >> Janet, but as you well know, the English language is constantly
>> >> changing.
>>
>> >> Not always for the good, I
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> will admit, but change it does.
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> N.
>>
>> >
>>
>> > Yeah, like, you know what I mean, like, duh.
>>
>>
>>
>> irregardless.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> if you have any further questions, just ax me.
>
>
> I'll be certain to ast-chu.
>
> Diane Sawyer canNOT say 'asked'. Ever notice? Present tense only.
>
> Tough word: sixths. 'Cut that pizza into sixths.'

I hear a lot of "fith" for "fifth", "ohways" for "always" and "boo-at" for
"but".

On Monday, August 4, 2014 5:28:12 PM UTC-4, Kalmia wrote:

> I'll be certain to ast-chu.
>
gesundheit

On Monday, August 4, 2014 12:09:54 PM UTC-4, Kalmia wrote:
>
> Would you use it adjectivally in a sentence, please?

Here's how Carlin used it:

The English word forte, meaning "specialty" or "strong point," is not pronounced "for-tay." Got that? It is pronounced "fort." The Italian word forte, used in music notation, is pronounced "for-tay," and it instructs the musician to play loud: "She plays the skin flute, and her forte [fort] is playing forte [for-tay]." Look it up. And don't give me that whiny shit, "For-tay is listed as the second preference." There's a reason it's second: because it's not first!

(A lot more here):

http://sense.net//~blaine/funstuff/carlin.html

It's from his 1990s book, "Brain Droppings."


>
> I bet you cringe at what some of the news-anchors are saying.


I certainly do, usually regarding their grammar. See Carlin's first paragraph at the link.

My TV hasn't been working lately, and it makes me realize more than ever just how much of viewers' time gets wasted on so-called news when they could read newspapers - IMO, a significant percentage of TV news, these days, is....kitten videos. Or stuff like that. If I had a kid, I'd put REAL limits on screen time, as my cousins do with their incredibly adorable, bright, well-read, and polite preteen kids - they even have an attention span!!

It disgusts me the way some print journalists, who should know better, sometimes say stuff like "things have just changed in child-rearing and there's nothing parents can do about it." No, they could. If they weren't such cowards. There is NO reason to put a TV or videogames in the kid's BEDROOM if you care about their reading skills at all. When they cry, just say: "Think how happy you'll be when, unlike your classmates, you'll actually be able to write and spell by the time you're 8. Maybe you'll even get an A or two."

Lenona.

On Tue, 5 Aug 2014 08:32:02 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

> On Monday, August 4, 2014 12:09:54 PM UTC-4, Kalmia wrote:
> >
> > Would you use it adjectivally in a sentence, please?
>
> Here's how Carlin used it:
>
> The English word forte, meaning "specialty" or "strong point," is not pronounced "for-tay." Got that? It is pronounced "fort." The Italian word forte, used in music notation, is pronounced "for-tay," and it instructs the musician to play loud: "She plays the skin flute, and her forte [fort] is playing forte [for-tay]." Look it up. And don't give me that whiny shit, "For-tay is listed as the second preference." There's a reason it's second: because it's not first!

Those fancy French words are best left to the French, British and
musicians. Americans hear a word pronounced "fort" and think of it as
an abbreviation of fortification. If we mean it's not a "strong
point", that's what we say...unless (of course) we're trying to
demonstrate how cosmopolitan we are. Then it's foot in mouth.

--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.

On 8/4/2014 8:48 PM, Julie Bove wrote:

> I hear a lot of "fith" for "fifth", "ohways" for "always" and "boo-at"
> for "but".

"boo-at"?

I read of lot of "bro" for brother and "prolly" for probably.

--
DreadfulBitch

I'm a nobody, nobody is perfect, therefore I'm perfect.