CRT Licensing Review final report

[Marshian]

1 hour ago, Machpoint005 said:

Written English was standardised, somewhat randomly, only a couple of centuries ago but the wide variation in spelling of a particular phoneme is a result of the rich cultural ancestry of our language (Latin, French, Anglo-Saxon, Celtic, Norse etc). I rather like it that way.

+1 for that.  I rather think that, by the time writing became an issue, words of any origin had been assimilated into early modern English in the main.  Spelling differences largely arose from writers working in isolation - different monasteries, etc.  I appreciate there are some salient opposite examples, such as the Vale of Belvoir!

An example in favour of my point would be the River Soar.  It's spelt the same as the verb, although it's a noun.  It comes from a lost language, which pre-dates the earliest forms of Celtic.  There's a parallel in Germany - the Saar 

43 minutes ago, TheBiscuits said:

a shew is a small rodent like a mice.

The Taming of the Shew?

[Machpoint005]

1 hour ago, rusty69 said:

But what then happens to Shakespeare.No one will understand it.....Oh hang on.

...apart from the fact that you probably use Shakespearean quotes every day, but do not realise you are doing so?

Or is it all Greek to you? (Julius Caesar, Act 1, scene 3).

Edited March 7, 2018 by Machpoint005
sp.

[jddevel]

Back on topic this the reply I got from CRT in response to my email see post 46.

 

Thanks for your emails and thoughts. Please keep an eye for this Friday’s edition of Boaters’ Update where I’ll be summarising, and answering, the common subjects that people have been in touch about.

[Athy]

2 minutes ago, jddevel said:

Back on topic this the reply I got from CRT in response to my email see post 46.

 

Thanks for your emails and thoughts. Please keep an eye for this Friday’s edition of Boaters’ Update where I’ll be summarising, and answering, the common subjects that people have been in touch about.

But does this mean that they will be taking boaters' views into consideration, or are the changes set in stone?

[rusty69]

21 minutes ago, Machpoint005 said:

...apart from the fact that you probably use Shakespearean quotes every day, but do not realise you are doing so?

Or is it all Greek to you? (Julius Caesar, Act 1, scene 3).

Thou basest thing, avoid! hence, from my sight!
If after this command thou fraught the court
With thy unworthiness, thou diest: away!
Thou'rt poison to my blood.

[b0atman]

Usual subjects have hijacked another post 

 

[jddevel]

8 minutes ago, Athy said:

But does this mean that they will be taking boaters' views into consideration, or are the changes set in stone?

We will have to see.

[Alan de Enfield]

20 minutes ago, jddevel said:

Back on topic this the reply I got from CRT in response to my email see post 46.

 

Thanks for your emails and thoughts. Please keep an eye for this Friday’s edition of Boaters’ Update where I’ll be summarising, and answering, the common subjects that people have been in touch about.

Is this a different boaters update to that, that started the thread ? (Post #1)

[rusty69]

18 minutes ago, b0atman said:

Usual subjects have hijacked another post 

 

What manner of man is he?

[Alan de Enfield]

Just now, rusty69 said:

What manner of man is he?

Alas, I knew him well

[Ray T]

  22 minutes ago, b0atman said:

Usual subjects have hijacked another post 

 

4 minutes ago, rusty69 said:

What manner of man is he?

Cry 'Havoc,' and let slip the dogs of war;
That this foul deed shall smell above the earth
 

Edited March 7, 2018 by Ray T

[rusty69]

11 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

Alas, I knew him well

Alan,poor Baldrick! I knew him,a fellow of limited jest.

Edited March 7, 2018 by rusty69

[system 4-50]

2 hours ago, Machpoint005 said:

I rather like it that way.

and so do I. But lumbering our children with learning all that unecessary garbage? There are more useful things to learn.

[jds_1981]

4 hours ago, Detling said:

£25 per day is not enough, London has two types of live aboard boaters, those with little or no money for whom £10 per day would be to much, and those who can afford big VAT free widebeams (12.5 x 65 foot) to whom £25 is still cheaper then a mooring, let alone a residential mooring (25 x 365 = 9125) can you find a London mooring for that price.

Makes sense to have a significantly increased charge in London. Often see boats to or three deep nowadays. How would this be managed though? Lots of the boats don't pay their licences here or abide by the rules as it is. I think the cart would need some extra enforcement powers.

[magictime]

2 hours ago, system 4-50 said:

No, even though it jarrs, because it doesn't matter. What really annoys is that we are still using all these completely archaic spelling and grammar systems just because we inherited them.  It is time we revised written and spoken English to make it phonetic (ie if you can say it then you can spell it) and unambiguous and simple.  We have got some sense into measurement via metrication, we need to do the same for one of the most important tools in our lives, language.  We can preserve current English as "classical" English though that risks it becoming a marker of membership of an elite class who can afford to spend money on learning stuff that has no other value than to denote membership of that class.

So which approach would you favour?

1.) Come up with a standard spelling for every word in the language based on its pronunciation by people with a standard accent (Received Pronunciation, presumably)? Wouldn't that mean spelling still wasn't phonetic for most English speakers, and risk making the use of RP even more of a class marker than it already is?

2.) Come up with a distinct phonetic spelling of every word in the language for every distinct pronunciation of that word by people with different accents? That sort of multiplication of acceptable spellings doesn't seem desirable and surely doesn't meet the objective of making written English 'unambiguous and simple'.

[mrsmelly]

2 hours ago, KevMc said:

No no no and again no. Tell me what is sensible about metrication?   Tell me a metric measurement that makes sense in the real world.

Oh come on Kev its much more sensible going metric innitt? Lets face it its far easier for a 6 foot tall bloke to be envisaged as one thousand eight hundred and twenty eight point eight millimetres now isnt it!! 

[Dr Bob]

1 hour ago, b0atman said:

Usual subjects have hijacked another post 

 

Not me! I was at home watching Banana splits ( ex Blaster Bates, Shower of Shit over Cheshire).

[rusty69]

2 minutes ago, Dr Bob said:

Not me! I was at home watching Banana splits ( ex Blaster Bates, Shower of Shit over Cheshire).

Round em up I say .Put em in a field and ...................

[Machpoint005]

3 hours ago, system 4-50 said:

and so do I. But lumbering our children with learning all that unecessary garbage? There are more useful things to learn.

Yes, but not all that many as worthwhile.

[Dr Bob]

2 hours ago, rusty69 said:

Round em up I say .Put em in a field and ...................

...........ask them how to move a Latvian boat back into the water?

[Machpoint005]

5 hours ago, KevMc said:

No no no and again no. Tell me what is sensible about metrication?   Tell me a metric measurement that makes sense in the real world.

Sensible: it's a coherent system of units, and doesn't need fudge factors to relate one parameter to another. "Pounds force" and "poundals" indeed. 

Degrees Celsius make perfect sense, especially since they go negative when water freezes.

The hectare is an easily visualised unit of area, since it is a square of 100m and there are 100 of them in a square kilometre, which is a lot easier than 640 acres in a square mile. What is the side of a square of area one acre, please? 

Kilograms are very convenient - think bags of sugar. The British/American systems disagree here because we were used to measuringn stones, and they use pounds.

A litre is a kitchen jug, and we have been happily buying diesel by the litre for decades. As I pointed out on another thread recently, our American friends can't even agree with us on how big a gallon (or a pint) is, and they measure solids by volume, for goodness' sake!

3 hours ago, mrsmelly said:

Oh come on Kev its much more sensible going metric innitt? Lets face it its far easier for a 6 foot tall bloke to be envisaged as one thousand eight hundred and twenty eight point eight millimetres now isnt it!! 

Easy enough to imagine a 1.8-metre bloke. He is also quite tall. Why does the metric measurement need quoting to a tenth of a millimetre?

Do you still convert £p to £sd?

[rusty69]

2 minutes ago, Dr Bob said:

...........ask them how to move a Latvian boat back into the water?

I'm not sure Kenny Everett had a boat, or was Latvian.

[MtB]

2 minutes ago, Machpoint005 said:

Sensible: it's a coherent system of units

 

Imagine a hole (say an air vent), with an open area of 24,000 square millimetres. 

Can you? 

Really??!

[mrsmelly]

2 minutes ago, Machpoint005 said:

Sensible: it's a coherent system of units, and doesn't need fudge factors to relate one parameter to another. "Pounds force" and "poundals" indeed. 

Degrees Celsius make perfect sense, especially since they go negative when water freezes.

The hectare is an easily visualised unit of area, since it is a square of 100m and there are 100 of them in a square kilometre, which is a lot easier than 640 acres in a square mile. What is the side of a square of area one acre, please? 

Kilograms are very convenient - think bags of sugar. The British/American systems disagree here because we were used to measuringn stones, and they use pounds.

A litre is a kitchen jug, and we have been happily buying diesel by the litre for decades. As I pointed out on another thread recently, our American friends can't even agree with us on how big a gallon (or a pint) is, and they measure solids by volume, for goodness' sake!

Easy enough to imagine a 1.8-metre bloke. He is also quite tall. Why does the metric measurement need quoting to a tenth of a millimetre?

Do you still convert £p to £sd?

Before I posted I went online and looked at wardrobes. In nearly every advert they were quoted in mms in the hundreds or thousands of. Check it out hxwxd etc in mms and makes no sense whatsoever, weird innitt.

[Ray T]

18 minutes ago, Machpoint005 said:

 

Easy enough to imagine a 1.8-metre bloke. He is also quite tall. Why does the metric measurement need quoting to a tenth of a millimetre?

 

Useless facts department, Mary Ann Ochota is 1.8 meters tall.  The lady who presented Britain Afloat, so it is canal related. 

http://maryannochota.com/

Edited March 7, 2018 by Ray T