glimpsing was Re: YAPT: Dutch ij and ui
|From:||David Barrow <davidab@...>|
|Date:||Saturday, July 24, 2004, 1:55|
Tim May wrote:
>Tristan Mc Leay wrote at 2004-07-23 21:34:38 (+1000)
> > Carsten Becker wrote:
> > > Hello!
> > >
> > > My parents decided the day before yesterday's noon
> > 'The day before yesterday's noon' is the same day as the day before
> > yesterday at 10 pee em. Do you mean something significant by that
> > phrase?
> > > to visit the Netherlands the other day. When reading the road
> > > signs, we weren't sure
> > You know how confused you made me here? When I finally worked out
> > that you meant you not only decided to visit another country, but
> > *you did it* within a few days, perhaps even hours, I decided that
> > I have to hate you. I can't visit another country without getting
> > on a plane or boat (or swimming). In future, I expect you to have a
> > considerable body of water between you and the nearest
> > country. (Note to Brits: The English Channel is not 'a considerable
> > body of water', and even if it were, Britain's too small to count
> > as a country.) Well, hahahaha, one day the European Union will be a
> > country just like the United States of America or the Commonwealth
> > of Australia (except that it'll still be close to Asia and
> > Africa...).
>If Britain's to small to qualify as a country, then clearly Carsten
>didn't, in fact, visit another country, since what he visited is even
>smaller. So no need to hate him.
>Britain is not a country; it is an island made up of three countries.
> > > BTW, it was a nice sunny (and very warm) day. We visited the
> > > historical centres of Gouda and Leiden and had a quick look at
> > > the shore promenade of Scheweningen, but there were too many
> > > people and it was too hot and everything was far too
> > > expensive. My legs hurt when we were at home again, and I was
> > > quite tired. Nevertheless, it was a nice day and I could get a
> > > glimpse at (of?) the Netherlands.
> > of
>"of" was my first reaction too, but on introspection I actually think
>"at" might be better in this case... I'm not really sure, though. It
>should be "got" or "was able to get" rather than "could get", I think.
>I have it as 'get/catch a glimpse of ' something; to glimpse something;
to glance at something