LL-L "Folklore" 2002.12.15 (01) [D/E/German]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
 L O W L A N D S - L * 15.DEC.2002 (01) * ISSN 189-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
 Web Site: <http://www.lowlands-l.net>  Email: <admin at lowlands-l.net>
 Rules & Guidelines: <http://www.lowlands-l.net/rules.htm>
 Posting Address: <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>
 Server Manual: <http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/1.8c/userindex.html>
 Archive: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html>
=======================================================================
 You have received this because you have been subscribed upon request.
 To unsubscribe, please send the command "signoff lowlands-l" as message
 text from the same account to <listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org> or
 sign off at <http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html>.
=======================================================================
 A=Afrikaans Ap=Appalachian B=Brabantish D=Dutch E=English F=Frisian
 L=Limburgish LS=Lowlands Saxon (Low German) S=Scots Sh=Shetlandic
               V=(West)Flemish Z=Zeelandic (Zeêuws)
=======================================================================

From: rossmay <rossmay at bellsouth.net>
Subject: LL-L "Measure words" 2002.12.14 (05) [D/E]

Ron, pleased to make the aquaintance, I am sure.  The "higher level" that I
was speaking of was one of taking into consideration the nature of people.
This is very similar to the way languages change over the years, making it a
"living" language.
       First, no people are going to, by government edict, change their
system of measurement.  I am sure that the Norman Dukes would have preferred
that the commoners of Britain speak Norman French, and several times took
measures that tried to force this.  But the citizenry will speak the
language that they choose to, just as the people of America have chosen to
use the SAE measurements instead of the metric.  Metric usage has been
pushed in the schools for many years, and it simply will not replace the
common one that we use.  Not unless the people are willing.  It is a
language of sorts, this metric system.  It is sensible, being based on the
divisibility of tens, and it is exponentially sound.  But, this does not
reflect the will of the many.  Maybe someday.  When pigs fly.  (grin)
Ross May, Gulfport, Mississippi, USA

----------

From: Stan Levinson <stlev99 at yahoo.com>
Subject: LL-L "Measure words" 2002.12.14 (05) [D/E]

Okay, I know we are beating this to death, but here is
the word on American (and Canadian) football fields,
from
http://www.americanfootballbettinglines.com/rules_differences.htm#FIELD
"In the NFL (pro) and NCAA (University), the field is
a total of 120 yards long--100 yards of playing field
with two end zones, one at either end of the field,
each end zone being 10 yards long. The field is 53 1/3
yards wide. NFL goal posts are 18 1/2 feet wide, with
the crossbar at 10 feet, while the NCAA widened their
goals to 23'4''. Also, the NCAA uses two supports for
goal posts, while the NFL has only one.

In the CFL (Canadian pro), the field is a total of 150
yards by 65 yards, having two 20-yard end zones, for
110 yards of playing field. "

Stan

> From: Gustaaf Van Moorsel <gvanmoor at cv3.cv.nrao.edu>
> Subject: LL-L "Measure words" 2002.12.14 (04) [E]
>> Een Amerikaans football field is precies 50 yards
> bij 100 yards.
> Zo'n veld als oppervlakteeenheid te nemen
> introduceert dus geen
> nieuwe eenheden ...
>
> Een voetbalveld heeft geen vaste afmetingen en is
> daarom on-
> geschikt als oppervlaktemaat.  Voor de afmetingen
> geldt:
>
> lengte tussen de 100 en 130 yards
> breedte tussen de 50 en 100 yards
>
> verder mag het veld niet vierkant zijn.
>
> Voor officiele velden is de vrijheid wat geringer:
>
> lengte tussen de 110 en 120 yards
> breedte tussen de 70 en 80 yards
>
> Nemen we de gemiddelden geldt dus dat een
> voetbalveld zo'n
> 70% groter is dan een football field.
>
> Gustaaf
>
> ----------
>
> From: Stan Levinson <stlev99 at yahoo.com>
> Subject: LL-L "Measure words" 2002.12.14 (04) [E]
>
> Wim,
> Sorry, that is not possible because you folk are
> just
> too imprecise with the size of your soccer
> fields....
> :)
> Stan
> > From: Wim <wkv at home.nl>
> > Subject: LL-L "Measure words" 2002.12.14 (02) [E]
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Can we please have that translated into
> soccerfield
> > sizes??  Just to
> > make it understandable for us Europeans?
> >
> > Wim.

----------

From: UB82DN at aol.com <UB82DN at aol.com>
Subject: LL-L "Measure words" 2002.12.14 (02) [E]

Liewe Laaglanders,

So far no one has given us anything like a good reason for American adoption
of the metric system. With one of the largest internal markets in the world,
we don't need it. Firms involved in foreign trade internalize whatever costs
are involved in conversion, and I don't see why they should externalize
their
costs onto the rest of us. A lot of foreign trade seems to take place
anyway.

If we ever do need the metric system, it will be adopted gradually through
normal market decisions. No politician will have to lift a finger.

Traditional measures were not "designed" during "Dark Ages" (a concept whose
range has been much reduced, first by the Romantic movement and then by
serious historical scholarship), they arose from practical experience in
different fields of endeavor and their continued usefulness was
justification
enough for their persistence. Drywall screws are only a few decades old and
are measured in inches, rather than in pennies, the standard for nails. This
difference has not prevented a single house from being built. Making either
or both metric will not yield any appreciable improvement in house
construction. Those who aren't carpenters need not be bothered by the
"irrationality" of drywall screws in inches as against 3d, 4d, 6d, 8d, etc.,
nails.

As for Canada, don't ever ask for 10 penny nails in Markdale, Ontario. They
have forgotten a perfectly good measuring system there, although oddly
enough
it was  still in use in West London (UK) last time I was there in 1990. On
the job, you don't actually need to "know" the length of an 8d nail in
inches
or metric whatevers; you already know from experience whether it will hold
what you're nailing or whether it will split the board. Noncarpenters don't
need to know this and no one calls for making them adopt the penny-nail
system.

Scientists find the metric system useful - and good for them. Carpenters lay
out your walls in 2x4s on 16 or 24 inch centers and knock them together with
12d or 16d nails. (The "d" = denarius, Latin for penny, an "irrational"
survival that does no harm.)  The "2x4s" are actually 1 1/2" by 3 1/2."
There
is no harm in the discrepancy between nominal and real dimension. The
drywall
hangers hang sheetrock on the 2x4s with 1" screws and go away. The painters
put paint on the sheetrock. Still no harm done, and it is probably a matter
of indifference whether they do so from gallon cans or litre cans, although
the painters may care.

The craft of carpentry (for one) does not need metric reform.

If Canadians put up signs in both systems, they are 1) being polite (this is
quite possible), 2) making a rational business decision, given that they
have
American customers, or 3) expressing suppressed resentment at having been
forced to adopt a system of measurement whose only real recommendation, for
everyday use, lies in its relationship to the French Revolution, but there
is
no need to discuss that disaster here.

The IQ of Americans does not enter into it.

There is quite enough levelling and legislated uniformity in the world as it
is. Why on earth should we want any more? If a few people want the metric
system, where do they get the right to impose it on those who don't?

American adoption of the metric system is perhaps the least imperative
reform
of which I can think. One might as well demand that everyone in the world
speak the same language or profess the same religion.

Cheers,
Joe Stromberg

-----------

From: Reuben Epp <repp at silk.net>
Subject: LL-L "Measure words" 2002.12.14 (05) [D/E]

.> From: rossmay <rossmay at bellsouth.net>
> Subject: LL-L "Measure words" 2002.12.14 (02) [E]
>
> I really like this site, but why the antipathy towards Americans?  We use
> both systems, but prefer the older system, because it is easier to relate
to
> inches, feet, and yards than to centimeters and such.  We learn both
systems
> in school and then use the one that we prefer for common everyday
purposes.
> As you may remember from your school days (or maybe you didn't learn this)
> the inch is approximately equal to the average first index finger joint,
the
> foot is about the same size as the average man's foot, etc.  This is easy
to
> relate to in common things, although we can just as easily convert
ourselves
> to the metric system.  A kind of "freedom of choice" to coin a vulgarly
used
> phrase.  I would love to post to this list, but are you guys up to
speaking
> on a little higher level?
>      Ross May, Gulfport, Mississippi, USA   rossmay at bellsouth.net

Dear Lowlanders,

Having been in the vocational training sytem in British Columbia during the
period when metric measurements were supposed to come into being in
Canada, as legislated by the government of Canada, I was much involved
in the proposed changeover from conventional British measure to Metric
measure. Since I had been rather well-introduced to metric measurements
during my school years in the late 1920's and early 1930's, I felt no
particular difficulties other than a suspicion that Canada was probably
not ready nor in favour of conversion to metric measurements.

I suspected that conversion to metric measurement in Canada would
not fly. Subesequent events have shown that it didn't! Oh sure, we
changed our highway speed limits to kilometres-per-hour rather than
miles-per-hour, but our grocery stores continue carefully to price food
at so-much-per pound as well as so-much-per-kilogram. A sheet of
plywood is nowhere to be found in dimensions other than 48 by
96 inches. Of course, special dimensions can be obtained by special
order -- at special prices.

Let us not forget that a full circle continues to consist of 360 degrees
and that a year consists of 12 months, of which the last month,
December, is named the tenth. I wonder why! How can you metricate
that?

Cheers!

Reuben

----------

From: rlantz <2x47j3 at shentel.net>
Subject: LL-L "Measure words" 2002.12.14 (04) [E]


==================================END===================================
* Please submit postings to <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>.
* Postings will be displayed unedited in digest form.
* Please display only the relevant parts of quotes in your replies.
* Commands for automated functions (including "signoff lowlands-l") are
  to be sent to <listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org> or at
  <http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html>.
=======================================================================