I keep coming across American knitters who are buying yarn to make things with. I know little about the technicalities, but I'm pretty sure my mother would buy wool, and make things out of wool. Of course I know the word 'yarn', but I can't think of an occasion when I would use it for the material, which in all its forms is 'wool' to me.

(In fact it has a connotation of 'tangled' for me: a skein of wool that the cat's got to and spread around. And of course the figurative use as a tale.)

Strange, for me, as well as the A-H, yarn can be made from wool or other material, even synthetic. Wool is the unspun stuff you get off of sheep. After spinning it, it's yarn. It means two entirely different things if somebody told me they were going to buy wool or yarn. Interesting etymology: from the same root *gher@- as hernia and c(h)ord.

Yes, I have never heard people saying they were knitting with "wool" or "nylon." It is interesting to see how words are derived because I just can't figure out how "hernia" and "chord" could come from the same root as "yarn." I also wonder how the informal definition of "yarn" developed.

An aside about "yarn" is that knitting, at least in the midwest, seems to skip a generation. That is, my mom knit, but I didn't. Now knitting is really hot again. That's similar to men's underwear. My dad wore boxers, our generation seems to wear Jockeys, and our kids are wearing boxers again.

SOED dates 'wool' sense 3.c, 'Twisted woollen yarn used for knitting and mending garments', to 1840, so perhaps this is a British innovation.

The figurative 'spin a yarn' is nautical in origin.

Oh, and I notice Kalleh uses 'knit' as preterite. With 'fit' I haver; I can say both: but I can only say 'knitted' as preterite.

One of the first manufacturing processes to be automated was textiles and it was this that started the Industrial revolution. So I think we can safely say that it was a British innovation since Britain is where the industrial revolution started.

So I think we can safely say that it was a British innovation since Britain is where the industrial revolution started.

Now, that's a surprise, Richard.

Oh, and I notice Kalleh uses 'knit' as preterite. With 'fit' I haver; I can say both: but I can only say 'knitted' as preterite.

I am afraid you have lost me, aput. How should I have said it? Is were knitting incorrect? Why is that?

No, I meant you write 'my mom knit, but I didn't', whereas I would write 'knitted' for that past tense. And it's nothing incorrect, it's just a different form. If you naturally say it (anything) it's correct.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Richard English:
One of the first manufacturing processes to be automated was textiles and it was this that started the Industrial revolution. So I think we can safely say that it was a British innovation since Britain is where the industrial revolution started.

---

I don't think it's entirely British. Wasn't Jaquard French? However, the famous Ned Ludd was British!

Obviously there will have been other nations involved and Jaquard's automated loom was one of the few textile inventions that was not British.

Most textile inventions were and, yes, Ned Ludd was British. And what were he and his fellow Luddites protesrting about? The automation of the textile industry then proceeding apace in England.

Like it or no, the industrial revolution started in England.

Wasn't Jaquard French?

I'd always heard that the British invented the French to seduce the Germans and annoy the Italians. Could be wrong. But seriously, yes the Industrial Revolution was invented in the UK and exported to Europe and the Colonies. What do you think Blake was on about with his dark satanic mills? Does anybody still say builded for built?

, yes, Ned Ludd was British. And what were he and his fellow Luddites protesrting about? The automation of the textile industry then proceeding apace in England.

Like it or no, the industrial revolution started in England.[/QUOTE]

But Luddites were protesting a FRENCH improvement to the looms!

Now, let's see, who invented the light bulb again?

Okay...we won't go there!

Your question about "builded for built" is an interesting one, jheem, that Shu and I have been talking about lately. I asked him why the Brits say "learnt" and "spelt," and we don't. But, we say "dreamt" and "slept." I am sure there are others, but are there others that only the Brits say or that only the Americans say? Is it more a British style to add the "t?" Was there ever a 'meaned' instead of 'meant?' Or a 'keeped' instead of 'kept?'

Don't know who invented the light bulb; Edison just made it viable. Now, see if you're smart enough to tell me who invented a practical way to distribute the electricity to light those bulbs? No, NOT Edison!!! This guy died a pauper!

Who says, "builded?" All very logical three-year-olds!

Who says, "builded?"

William Blake (1757-1827) in his poem "Jerusalem".

And did those feet in ancient time
Walk upon England's mountain green?
And was the holy Lamb of God
On England's pleasant pastures seen?
And did the countenance divine
Shine forth upon our clouded hills?
And was Jerusalem builded here
Among those dark satanic mills?

Don't know who invented the light bulb

Joseph Wilson Swan (1828-1914) was one of many working on the light bulb problem. The pauper? Are you thinking of Nikola Tesla?

This message has been edited. Last edited by: jheem,

-t ~ -ed

It seems rather complicated. Why write slept but not lookt; note that both end with the same voiceless stop. The letters d and t complicate things since the suffix uses d. (Thus splitted and plodded with schwas between the final two consonants.) But then we say built, and Blake wrote builded.

Don't know who invented the light bulb; Edison just made it viable. Now, see if you're smart enough to tell me who invented a practical way to distribute the electricity to light those bulbs? No, NOT Edison!!! This guy died a pauper!

Uhhhh...that was a joke, Asa. We have discussed who invented the lightbulb ad nauseum here. Sorry I brought it up.

I don't know the answer, jheem, but Tesla was mentioned here.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Asa Lovejoy:
Don't know who invented the light bulb; Edison just made it viable. !

---

No, no, no, no, no Asa - she's kidding !
Don't let's start all that again.

And for God's sake don't mention vacuum cleaners.

Anyone who's interested can look back and read what I posted on the topic of light bulbs.

Anyone who has the time to spare can come with me and visit Cragside, lit throughout by Swan's electric light bulbs before Edison had sold a single one of his.

Just don't believe everything you see in the cinema; you'll end up believing the Americans broke the German Enigma code AND invented the first computer if you do.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Richard English:
Anyone who's interested can look back and read what I posted on the topic of light bulbs.

Anyone who has the time to spare can come with me and visit Cragside,
________________________________________________
Are they carbon arc lights? I'm sure they were of British origin.
_________________________________________________
Just don't believe everything you see in the cinema; you'll end up believing the Americans broke the German Enigma code AND invented the first computer if you do.

---

Now we're getting into the figurative meanings of "wool" and "Yarn!" We in the USA love yarns about our technological preeminence, even if we're getting the wool pulled over our eyes!

the Americans broke the German Enigma code AND invented the first computer

Oh, dear, oh, my. Let's see. Polish mathematicians help break the Enigma machine code (and supply the Allies with a working, earlier commercial model), and the German engineer Konrad Zuse is usually credited with inventing the first functioning digital computer, before the boys at Bletchley Park. Before that there were lots of prior claims (for computers): the guys at MIT who made analog computers to do calculus with, ole Babbage (for the UK) and even older Pascal and Leibniz (for France and what would become Germany). And Turing got his PhD at Princeton; his advisor was Alonzo Church.

Who was first? is usually not a very interesting question. What lead up to? is.

Quote "...Are they carbon arc lights? I'm sure they were of British origin..."

Indeed they were but I am speaking of Swan's incandescent light bulb, invented, operational and on sale before Edison's.

As I have agreed, Edison was clever enough to sell the idea of a power station to go with his lighting system; Cragside's electrical system was powered by hydro-electricity generated on Armstrong's estate.

Quote "...Oh, dear, oh, my. Let's see. Polish mathematicians help break the Enigma machine code (and supply the Allies with a working, earlier commercial model), ..."

And if you see that recent Holywood film about the Enigma saga you'll see that they claim that it was a group of US sailors who captured the first Enigma machine. Completely untrue.

And if you see that recent Holywood film about the Enigma saga you'll see that they claim that it was a group of US sailors who captured the first Enigma machine. Completely untrue.

I have seen U-571 and found it an entertaining film, but I also liked The Lord of the Rings and the (original) The Ladykillers. I learned long ago to make a distinction between fiction films and history.

The fiction film was based on some events, like the British capture of the U-110 in '41, with an Enigma machine aboard. Here's a nice dissection of the technical and historical inaccuracies in the movie. Another inaccuracy was that the sub used in the film was a model VII U-Boot, while the U-110 was in fact a IX-B. The idea that the British "captured" the first Engima machine is also untrue. The Poles gave the first Engima machine to them.

Now, beer was also not invented by the English, Germans, or the Americans, but by the ancient Sumerians. Proof? One of the oldest written texts extant is a recipe for beer.

Quote: "Beer was invented by the ancient Sumerians. One of the oldest written texts extant is a recipe for beer."

Which suggests that even at that time, beer was already far from new. Just out of idle curiousity, and straying far from the subject: Has anyone ever tried that recipe?

Edit: I just found this: Most historians think that brewing got started pretty much like this. We're not certain exactly when it happened, but it was at least several thousand years before the beginning of recorded history.
Scene one: About 7,000 years ago, somewhere in Mesopotamia, a woman is picking kernels of wild barley. from a meadow near her hut. The grain contains a lot of food value, but the kernels are hard and unappetizing. She has the idea that if she soaks them in a bowl of water, they'll become soft and easier to chew.
Scene two: About 6,999 years, 11 months, 3 1/2 weeks ago, same place. After forgetting for a few days about the barley she left soaking in the bowl, the woman suddenly discovers it. The combination of the late summer heat and the water allowed the grain to mash, converting much of its starch into sugar. Unusual smell, though. Let's let Mikey try it first. Hey! He likes it! The result is a much sweeter tasting porridge than anyone has ever tasted before. She decides this is a good idea, and soaks her grain on a regular basis.
Scene three: A bit of yeast from the surface of the wild grapes growing nearby is carried by the wind and lands in a bowl of soaking grain. The yeast goes to work on the sugar, fermenting it into alcohol. It not only tastes good, but it leaves you with a warm, fuzzy feeling afterward.

Beer has just been invented.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: shufitz,

quote:

---

Has anyone ever tried that recipe?

---

If by "anyone" you mean members of this forum, I'd suspect the answer is no. Although I wouldn't be surprised if Richard has...

The recipe has certainly been tried successfully by the Anchor Brewing Company in San Francisco. According to this page:

quote:

---

To celebrate the tenth anniversary of Anchor Brewing Company at its present location, we served the Ninkasi brew to members of the American Association of Micro Brewers, who were having their annual meeting in San Francisco. The beer was consumed in proper Sumerian fashion: sipped from large jugs using long drinking straws fashioned to resemble the gold and lapis-lazuli straws found in the mid-third millenium tomb of Lady Pu-abi at Ur.

Seven months later, a second group, convening at the University Museum to discuss our work, sampled our Ancient brew. Not all of the beer had survived, even with refrigeration. However, those bottles that were still good had aged, much like fine wine - the beer had a dry flavor lacking in bitterness. Aged Ninkasi beer tasted similar to a hard apple cider but retained the fragrance of dates. According to the Museum's Patrick McGovern, the beer "had the smoothness and efferves- cence of champagne and a slight aroma of dates." We had reproduced the beer that made Ninkasi famous! We do not claim to be correct in all of the details, but we have made a sincere effort to bring the art of the modern brewer to bear on the mystery of how Ancient beer might have been made four millennia ago.

---