Charles Ellson wrote:

If you mean an A-Z, anything used to be better

Better in what way? I always hated the Nicholson's.

On Mon, 3 Jul 2006 03:27:08 +0100, "John Rowland"
wrote:

Charles Ellson wrote:

If you mean an A-Z, anything used to be better

Better in what way?

Starting with the current subject, many details pertaining to railways
were well out of date (The appearance of "LMS", "LNER" and "GWR" in
many places tended to give a warning. Is Shepherds Bush still marked
CLR?) and a lot of the roads weren't much better, but as I also said:-
but they seem to improved in more recent years

I always hated the Nicholson's.

There's not a lot of difference for London now that they all seem to
be O.S.-derived mapping presented via different colour schemes. The
Nicholson's (possibly now merged and re-named) AFAIAA is the only one
which has reasonable coverage of the intra-M25 area, in the past some
other atlases labelled as "Greater London" failed to cover the entire
county never mind the extended conurbation, missing out odd bits at
the periphery (even though they were inhabited) or showing them at a
reduced scale.
--
_______
+---------------------------------------------------+ |\\ //|
| Charles Ellson: | | \\ // |
+---------------------------------------------------+ | |
| // \\ |
Alba gu brath |//___\\|

Dik T. Winter wrote:

What is plural in one language can very well become singular in
another language. Whether it was plural in the original lanuage does
not matter very much.

Generally, I agree. But some specific cases do get up my nose. e.g. I
couldn't care less when people talk about the operas they have seen
(opera being a Latin plural of opus). But for some reason it irritates
me when one of those Afghani fundamentalist Muslims isn't called a
"taleb". (Though on the scale of linguistic irritation, that does come
lower than when people talk about "one pence coins").
--
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p13309738.html
(47 365 at Birmingham New Street, 15 Sep 1979)

On Mon, 3 Jul 2006, Dik T. Winter wrote:
Phil Clark writes:
On Sun, 2 Jul 2006 09:54:57 +0100, "Richard M Willis"

Is panini already a plural word ?
Yes, the singular is panino.

As well as "salame" is the singular of "salami" ...

.... as native italian improper usage of the plural form sounds to me at
least funny when not irritating ...

I tend to disagree. What is plural in one language can very well become
singular in another language. Whether it was plural in the original
lanuage does not matter very much.

I tend to disagree with the latter statement as a matter of principle,
although it might be correct as an observation of actual usage.

In italian we have the rule that foreign words are invariable, so one
should always use the singular form even at the plural (we have singular
and plural articles ... and genders too). But there are some curious
practical (not codified) exceptions : the spanish word "murales" is
common for "wall paintings", and the other spanish word "peones" is
common to indicate "unqualified" members of parliament (not party
leaders, not chairmen of committees etc.) ... both are plural forms, but
commonly used also at the singular.

I guess a spaniard will feel like me when I hear "one panini"

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
is a newsreading account used by more persons to
avoid unwanted spam. Any mail returning to this address will be rejected.
Users can disclose their e-mail address in the article if they wish so.

"Chris Tolley" wrote in message

lower than when people talk about "one pence coins").

What is wrong with "one pence coins" ?

Richard [inSG19]



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"thoss" wrote:

Those apostrophes are fine. But I also have, dating from an earlier
age, Philips' Modern School Atlas, published by George Philip & Son Ltd.
I wonder what that one is doing there.

If it was father and son, then presumably there were two Philips.

--
Dave Fossett
Saitama, Japan
http://jtrains.fotopic.net/

In message , at 09:16:52 on
Mon, 3 Jul 2006, Richard M Willis
remarked:
What is wrong with "one pence coins" ?

Linguistically should be "One Penny coins", and whatever the merits of
an argument that the currency is called Pounds and Pence (of which the
coin has a value of Zero pounds and one pence), the coin *does* have
"One Penny" written on it.

And you wouldn't call a £1 coin a "One Pounds Coin", would you? (Which
you would by analogy with "Pounds and Pence")
--
Roland Perry

Richard M Willis wrote:

"Chris Tolley" wrote in message

lower than when people talk about "one pence coins").

What is wrong with "one pence coins" ?

Read one and see for yourself.

--
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p12906833.html
(47 331 at Bescot, 25 Apr 1999)

On Mon, 3 Jul 2006 Richard M Willis wrote:

What is wrong with "one pence coins" ?

Exactly the same thing as is wrong in, say, "one pounds coins".
--
Thoss

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 09:16:52 on
Mon, 3 Jul 2006, Richard M Willis
remarked:
What is wrong with "one pence coins" ?

Linguistically should be "One Penny coins", and whatever the merits of
an argument that the currency is called Pounds and Pence (of which the
coin has a value of Zero pounds and one pence), the coin *does* have
"One Penny" written on it.

Hmm. I measure things in metres, centimetres and millimetres. I don't call
this "m AND cm AND mm". Consequently, I would call our currency pounds xor
pence.

"penny" does not exist as far as I am concerned.
"one-pence coin","one-hundred-pence coin", "one-deci-pound coin",
"five-hundred-pence note" are all valid in the same

way that a "one-centimetre rule" or a "one-hundred-centimetre box" are all
valid.

Richard [in SG19]




And you wouldn't call a £1 coin a "One Pounds Coin", would you? (Which
you would by analogy with "Pounds and Pence")
--
Roland Perry



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com