Guest murta Posted May 6, 2001 Share Posted May 6, 2001 Eatery is an American word for restaurant (think it's localised). They might as well call a library a readery, a shop a buyery, a butchers a meatery... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frenchyd Posted May 6, 2001 Share Posted May 6, 2001 i call it a resteraunt. bah. and meatery sounds good. im gonna call more things that. ------------------ FrenchyD Visit my site? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MtBlanc Posted May 6, 2001 Share Posted May 6, 2001 Originally posted by murta: Americans/Canadians use the dumbest words ever Hey, hey! Don't group Americans and Canadians together! I'm deeply offended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frenchyd Posted May 6, 2001 Share Posted May 6, 2001 bah i've lived in both. we are the same. admit it. ------------------ FrenchyD Visit my site? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MtBlanc Posted May 6, 2001 Share Posted May 6, 2001 No, it's not true. Canada may be heavily influenced by American culture, but they shouldn't be grouped together. *Dinghy Dog realizes something.* Wait a minute here. Where did you live in the US Frenchy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiScO StU Posted May 6, 2001 Share Posted May 6, 2001 Hey, I've had this discussion countless times: Australians are just spawn of British criminals Americans/Canadians use the dumbest words ever You're using OUR language (except you added crap words like flashlight, sidewalk and EATERY)and if it wasn't for the British neither of you would exist so SHAT IT!!! sorry, **** i don`t know how to take damn quotes. ummmm, murta, the spanish and french arrived in canada and the us long before the english, also the english language was taken from the french language, so technically we aren`t using your language and canada and the states would be here even without the help of the english, of course we would all be speaking french.I will give you credit for the australian line, yes the english were the only european country that tried to colonize australia and they all were criminals just like the french ones in "nouvelle france". another note: the vikings were the first europeans in the new land. ------------------ [This message has been edited by DiScO StU (edited May 05, 2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Natty Posted May 6, 2001 Share Posted May 6, 2001 But everyone is offspring of Adam and Eve so technically we're all related AND so therefore we all learned Adam and Eve's language and then everyone like the French and the Japanese and the other people made up their own language. So Adam and Eve invented the English language, not the English people coz they don't have the intelligence to do so And BTW, I'm part Irish, Part French part Scottish and unfortunatly, part English I'm onnnnnnnnly joking I don't mind English, but my ancestors didn't come out here coz they were nawdy, they came out here, I don't know why, but they didn't steal coz my family is a good family ------------------ Check Out My New Homepage, And Sign The Guestbook, Otherwise I'll Be Upset! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Brighteyesmonkey Posted May 6, 2001 Share Posted May 6, 2001 RIGHT! Yes their right. We sent our criminals to Australia.Cos it was desolate.And they spawned the ozzies of today. The white american/canadians were english to start with. A little thing called the pilgrims comes to mind. The english sent people to start a world in America. You Americans ARE English! (Bows his head in shame). Your also IRISH! How much worse can you be?! The Royal Family are a symbol.They were stupid. But their cathing on! Their all useing thier power (and emense spare ime) to raise money for charities.The taxes we spend on rubbish. The royals take out and put in charities. Now thats good. And the Queen. With her knowledge and experience of the world goes to talk with other world leaders and they exchange ways to better thier countries. The royal family have their uses. And the English began the world! RULE BRITANIA! BRITANIA RULE THE WORLD uumm LA LA LALALALA LA LA DA DA DA DA! ------------------ [This message has been edited by Brighteyesmonkey (edited May 06, 2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Natty Posted May 6, 2001 Share Posted May 6, 2001 All hail Prince William I stand by my claim, I'm not of English desent, I'm of Adam and Eve desent and I don't fink they were British, for the love of god I hope they weren't, dear god please don't let it be true Hehehehehe ------------------ Check Out My New Homepage, And Sign The Guestbook, Otherwise I'll Be Upset! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NiKo Posted May 6, 2001 Share Posted May 6, 2001 english, american, australians...whats the difrent!? they all have eyelashes and thats whats important here..... ------------------ [This message has been edited by NiKo (edited May 06, 2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Brighteyesmonkey Posted May 6, 2001 Share Posted May 6, 2001 Oh god now Natty your talking just like an English girl. They all love Prince William. It's gonna be weird having a member of the Royals that actually looks normal. And isn't deformed in some way. Charles :Huge Ears! Fergie: Well just plan ugly Andrew: Gay as hell! And looks like my weird noisy neighbour. And Harry! God help us. I think Will probably got his looks from Diana. Cos his dads a tart. ------------------ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NiKo Posted May 6, 2001 Share Posted May 6, 2001 i say we all lay politics aside and focuse on the one thing we all have in common..... eyelashes ------------------ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frenchyd Posted May 6, 2001 Share Posted May 6, 2001 Originally posted by Dinghy Dog: No, it's not true. Canada may be heavily influenced by American culture, but they shouldn't be grouped together. *Dinghy Dog realizes something.* Wait a minute here. Where did you live in the US Frenchy? California. San Jose/Bay Area. I just realized something to. Niko always complains about how Topicz get turned around...... thats usually me ------------------ FrenchyD Visit my site? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NiKo Posted May 6, 2001 Share Posted May 6, 2001 nah frenchy. who am i to complain? the important thing is we have eylashes ------------------ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest murta Posted May 6, 2001 Share Posted May 6, 2001 Originally posted by DiScO StU: Hey, I've had this discussion countless times: Australians are just spawn of British criminals Americans/Canadians use the dumbest words ever You're using OUR language (except you added crap words like flashlight, sidewalk and EATERY)and if it wasn't for the British neither of you would exist so SHAT IT!!! sorry, **** i don`t know how to take damn quotes. ummmm, murta, the spanish and french arrived in canada and the us long before the english, also the english language was taken from the french language, so technically we aren`t using your language and canada and the states would be here even without the help of the english, of course we would all be speaking french.I will give you credit for the australian line, yes the english were the only european country that tried to colonize australia and they all were criminals just like the french ones in "nouvelle france". another note: the vikings were the first europeans in the new land. And French is taken from Latin, all languages come from somewhere, but how many words used in america come DIRECTLY from French? Plus I know the Spanish landed before us but they didn't colonise very much in North America, likewise with the French. Spanish went to South America and French went to Canada. I think there were some wars between us or something (don't know anything about American history 'cos most of it's boring ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MtBlanc Posted May 6, 2001 Share Posted May 6, 2001 Originally posted by DiScO StU: canada and the states would be here even without the help of the english. My God, this is the stupidest thing I have ever read on these forums. Please, no offense to the magnificent Disco Stu, but look at this thing! It's hilarious. This is so wrong. I'm deciding on whether I should explain this to you here, or just recommend a good history book for you. First off, you are trying to say that everything would be here, except we'd be French. Ha! Did you know what the French were trying to do? They had no imperialistic claims to the New World, they just wanted fur! They didn't care about infastructure and providing a liveable colony, they were just using it for commercial purposes. While they had many claims on the Mississippi and the grand area called Louisiana (not the state) they were just trying to exploit that area to bring in some francs for the mother country. England on the other hand, while also trying to exploit the land for raw materials, also wanted to provide a habitable area and build up the area. They were the ones who desired more land. Ever hear of King George's War? Listen, I could go on forever about this, but it's just not appropriate in the forum setting. On the language thing: I agree a lot with murta on this one. First off, English is mainly a Germanic language, but has heavy Romance (Latin) influences. For example, the primary structure of English has Germanic roots, whereas a majority of the words have Romance influences. England was originally settled by people from areas with Germanic languages, primarily Scandanavia and Northern Europe, I think (please correct me if I'm wrong). When the Romans added England or Britannia rather to their empire, their words came to be a part of the English language. French is a very direct descendant of Latin. It started out that way and will remain like that. However, many words in the English language come directly from Old French, but these are words we don't use much. There happen to be quite a few cognates in both languages, just showing the Latin influences on both English and French. Damn, I'm tired. I think I'll have to go take a nap. Whoever read through all of this, I'll send you $5. ------------------ "I hope I die before I get old." -Roger Daltrey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Brighteyesmonkey Posted May 6, 2001 Share Posted May 6, 2001 Well I read it but $5 wouldn't be much good to me though. 5 quid might. Your right "Most" (not all) of England is derived from Scandinavia etc by the Vikings and Saxons.But i'm talking like hundreds of years in the future. When England sailed to make a New World. Thats when the Americans got their language/skin colour etc from. But then the Irish went there in the Famine. And now the world is cursed by Irish-Americans! Hahaha they must be so funny to talk to. ------------------ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiScO StU Posted May 7, 2001 Share Posted May 7, 2001 dinghy dog you aren`t completely correct i will give you credit for the fur, the french needed fur to make their damn top hats, but anyway cod was the biggest industie. also the english had the stronget navy, and they wanted canada for the wood. BUT, a strong but, have you forgoten about the acadians, these peeps came from france to start a new life in new france, but were deported by the english during "la guerre de sept ans" meaning the 7 year war. also after JAMES WOLF won quebec napoleon still had dreams of colonizing louisiana. when you said all they wanted was the fur your thinking of the couruers de boits, french merchants who trated with the natives for beaver skin, because many jeusuits priests and missionaries came to north america to convert the natives, they made peace with the hurons an indian tribe and adventually suffered the same fate as they did. the leader jean de bebeuf was scalped and tortuered by the iroquis tribe. and anyway the french wanted quebec not just for fur because after the english toke over they still wanted to keep quebec/bas canada. ------------------ [This message has been edited by DiScO StU (edited May 06, 2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MtBlanc Posted May 7, 2001 Share Posted May 7, 2001 Woah, let's stick to the arguement here Disco Stu. I thought we were talking about how if England had not participated in the colonization of the New World, Canada and the United States would not have been created, not let's find silly little technicalities to attempt to prove Dinghy wrong and attempt to make him look silly. First off, cod was one of the largest industries, but let's remember cod fishing was off of Newfoundland, and fishing is little reason to attempt inland colonization. England used many of its colonies for wood, principally the New England colonies, some of the Middle Colonies, and Canada. However, this does not say why France would have colonized the interior, only the coasts, and does not contribute to an arguement, you just want to make me look silly. The Acadians did colonize the New World, but as they did contribute to agriculture in the region, their towns, all principally on the coast, were used as hubs for both fishing and fur trade. The most important flaw in your arguement is that the Acadians had no ties to France. While they were all French in heritage and preferred them in commerce, they had no ties to the French government, and show no proof that France would extensively colonize the New World. French people and the French government are two very different things. And yes, they were deported by the English during the French and Indian War, but I don't see how that proves me wrong. It doesn't really matter since Acadia came under English control during Queen Anne's War. Yes, James Wolfe did conquer Quebec. Napoleon had dreams of colonizing Louisiana 50 years after most of Wolfe's exploits and after Napoleon had recieved Louisiana from the Spanish. Yes, he had dreams, but never acted on them as he needed funds to continue his wars in Europe. But the most important flaw in this argument is: THE UNITED STATES WERE ALREADY AROUND BY THEN. Missionaries don't result in colonization, they are just a reason for it. Look at California and the Southwest of the United States. When that area was under Spanish control, they built many missions. However, the region remained sparsely populated. And yes, the French did want to keep Quebec because it was financially successful due to the fur and other industries. I don't see why you are trying to argue here. Once again, $5 bucks to anyone who reads this monster. ------------------ "I hope I die before I get old." -Roger Daltrey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frenchyd Posted May 7, 2001 Share Posted May 7, 2001 $5 aint worth it ------------------ FrenchyD Visit my site? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiScO StU Posted May 7, 2001 Share Posted May 7, 2001 no comment, i withdraw from the debate, you win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MtBlanc Posted May 7, 2001 Share Posted May 7, 2001 No, no one wins in debates like those. I've just realized what silly things we argue about. Let's shake hands and forget this ever happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heracio T. Marley Posted May 7, 2001 Share Posted May 7, 2001 I think i read it but i cant tell.oh well no $5. oh pooh ------------------ AHHHHHHH I grew 2 more heads am I going crazy? please dont answer that. Why'd you tell me that now I need another coconut visit my website at http://www.heraciossite.homestead.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Natty Posted May 7, 2001 Share Posted May 7, 2001 I DO NOT SOUND LIKE AN ENGLISH GIRL I was only pointing out that Prince William is the only person with enough brain power to actually be king Besides, everyone knows that Aussie surfer guys are by far some of the hottest guys on Earth ------------------ Check Out My New Homepage, And Sign The Guestbook, Otherwise I'll Be Upset! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest murta Posted May 7, 2001 Share Posted May 7, 2001 You make top-hats out of FUR? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.