I am proofreading a book about the Russian Revolution and believe me, "counterrevolutionary" is one word. No hyphen. But I don't blame the author one bit for resisting Webster's on this one.
I would ONLY have a formal opinion on this particular point if I were a citizen of the UK.
Unofficially, as a fan of the separation of Church and State, Checks and Balances, Nick and Nora, I would be a *pro*disestablishmentarian. Is that a word?
But Manfred, I gathered you were a monarchist? Wouldn't that make you antidisestablishment-y-ish? (You know, this is all foggy to us Yanks--the word isn't even in my Webster's--so forgive if I've offended.)
Yes, of course! isnt everyone a Monarchist? But Antidisestablishmentarianism means being part of a movement, and I was christened a Catholic, for my sins (ho ho!...sigh...) so if anything, I should be Anti - Antidisestablishmentarionaism.
Just teasing about the, erm, Pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis, I'm just fascinated by those wonderful long words...my job sometimes takes me to a town in Anglesey, North Wales called, in all seriousness, Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch. Just to baffle the English, I think.
When corresponding, I get someone else to address the envelope...
Well, I support the constitutional monarchy because then we cant have any of our mostly appalling politicians as head of state...so the Prime Minister cant declare war, impose a constitution etc.
It doesnt stop them from being buffoons, but it slows them up a bit.
Its hard or indeed impossible to be a monarchist in the US, I would have thought... You all seemed to come out against it, as I recall...not like those nice folks in Canada...
Actually, the American colonists were split by thirds, I gather, about getting rid of the king. (One third didn't care, being more worried, I suppose, about what to eat?)
Of course, we didn't hear that when we were kids--every colonist was, we were taught, rah-rah for violent revolution. (Some things never change.)
I have never heard an American debate monarchy. It's simply never questioned, that I know of.
I am proofreading a book about the Russian Revolution and believe me, "counterrevolutionary" is one word. No hyphen. But I don't blame the author one bit for resisting Webster's on this one.
I would SO hyphenate that bad boy. Sheer instinct. ;)
ReplyDeletecounterrrrrrevolutionary
ReplyDeleteantidisestablishmentarian
ReplyDelete: )
Antidisestablishmentarianism? So you are (cough) against the movement to remove the primacy of the Anglican Church in the United Kingdom?
ReplyDeleteWere I not suffering from Pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis, I would argue the point...
Whoops--I left off the "-ism" didn't I?
ReplyDeleteI would ONLY have a formal opinion on this particular point if I were a citizen of the UK.
Unofficially, as a fan of the separation of Church and State, Checks and Balances, Nick and Nora, I would be a *pro*disestablishmentarian. Is that a word?
But Manfred, I gathered you were a monarchist? Wouldn't that make you antidisestablishment-y-ish?
(You know, this is all foggy to us Yanks--the word isn't even in my Webster's--so forgive if I've offended.)
P.S. I hope your pneumo-whatsit clears up soon. You must not have drunk enough Scotch on Loch Ness...
ReplyDeleteYes, of course! isnt everyone a Monarchist? But Antidisestablishmentarianism means being part of a movement, and I was christened a Catholic, for my sins (ho ho!...sigh...) so if anything, I should be Anti - Antidisestablishmentarionaism.
ReplyDeleteJust teasing about the, erm, Pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis, I'm just fascinated by those wonderful long words...my job sometimes takes me to a town in Anglesey, North Wales called, in all seriousness, Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch. Just to baffle the English, I think.
When corresponding, I get someone else to address the envelope...
You could abbreviate it "Sili-o-gogo".
ReplyDeleteMonarchists? Here where I live, if you said you were one, people would think you study big orange and black butterflies.
We actually call it Llanfair PG...saves time...
ReplyDeleteWell, I support the constitutional monarchy because then we cant have any of our mostly appalling politicians as head of state...so the Prime Minister cant declare war, impose a constitution etc.
It doesnt stop them from being buffoons, but it slows them up a bit.
Its hard or indeed impossible to be a monarchist in the US, I would have thought... You all seemed to come out against it, as I recall...not like those nice folks in Canada...
We do however seem to have a president...or is that vice-president?...who's a little unclear if he was elected or crowned.
ReplyDeleteActually, the American colonists were split by thirds, I gather, about getting rid of the king. (One third didn't care, being more worried, I suppose, about what to eat?)
ReplyDeleteOf course, we didn't hear that when we were kids--every colonist was, we were taught, rah-rah for violent revolution.
(Some things never change.)
I have never heard an American debate monarchy. It's simply never questioned, that I know of.
P.S. Hi, Bink!
ReplyDeleteYeah, our leaders may have dictatorial tendencies, but god forbid we should have a monarch!!!
That would be w-r-o-n-g.
Elected? I'm a little unsure about if he was elected too (at least in 2000)...