Driving Peeves: SUV's & Turn Signals

[zoobyshoe]

I can't find it in my Oxford either. Anyway, the opposite of a homophone.

"Alterphone" maybe? Same spelling, other sound. I can't recall there being a word for that.

 

[Gokul43201]

I can't find it in my Oxford either. Anyway, the opposite of a homophone.

Surprising ! I can't find it in a dictionary either.

But I'm positive Brew is correct on this one. Heterophones are words that have the same spelling but different pronunciations. (Ref : Get Thee to a Punnery, Richard Lederer)

Egs : wind, desert

 

[zoobyshoe]

Surprising ! I can't find it in a dictionary either.

But I'm positive Brew is correct on this one. Heterophones are words that have the same spelling but different pronunciations. (Ref : Get Thee to a Punnery, Richard Lederer)

Egs : wind, desert

I found it. It's homographne of two or more words spelled alike but different in meaning or derivation or pronounciaton (as the bow of a ship, a bow and arrow)

-Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary, 10th edition

 

[brewnog]

Good work zoob, good work. I thought for a moment that we were going to have to get Moonbear involved then.

 

[zoobyshoe]

Good work zoob, good work. I thought for a moment that we were going to have to get Moonbear involved then.

It's really odd. I don't recall ever having heard it before, but that kind of thing is so common it's hard to believe we weren't taught that in grade school. I remember homonym perfectly, but homograph seems completely new to me.

 

[Curious3141]

Did you miss these parts of what I said even as you quoted them?

It seems to me you're backtracking from your initial rather gung-ho post, where you said this :

... I take my foot off the gas and coast until they get irritated enough to change lanes. Then sometimes I'll spead up to keep them from getting in front of me.

Your intent seems quite clear there. You purposely slow down to get the tailgater irritated, then once they finally decide to undertake, you gleefully (and spitefully) speed up to prevent them from getting in front of you. This is called blocking, and it's dangerous and pointless. If, as you claim, you're already keeping a safe distance from the car in front of you in the fast lane, you're now assuredly closing into an unsafe distance. So there is a contradiction in what you've been posting, and I think you're toning down your opinion because you've been rightly called on it.

 

[Moonbear]

Good work zoob, good work. I thought for a moment that we were going to have to get Moonbear involved then.

Yeah, and you know what happens if I have to get involved.

It's really odd. I don't recall ever having heard it before, but that kind of thing is so common it's hard to believe we weren't taught that in grade school. I remember homonym perfectly, but homograph seems completely new to me.

Actually, I'd have been no use on that one. I don't think I've ever heard the term homograph before either. Homonyms and homophones, but no recollection of homograph. Dammit Mrs. Gottleib, you gave us an incomplete grammar book in school!

 

[BicycleTree]

So, in conclusion, each of the 80 or so towns surrounding Boston that are not already served by the T or by other buses could be outfitted with a commuter bus stop with regular buses at a total cost of not more than about $20 million, enabling commuter access to bus to all those commuters whose workdays follow regular rush hour to rush hour times, which has been estimated as a bit less than half. Given the hundreds of thousands of daily commuters, this would reduce traffic jams, commuter expense, and environmental expense enormously, if only the stupid commuters would actually use the buses provided for them, which they wouldn't.

 

[BicycleTree]

Well, I read back through the thread checking for the ability of posters to concede points. To some degree I found what I expected, but there was one thing that surprised me.

For myself:
Opposing points recognized as having merit: three
1.) errands commuters do after work, 2.) irregular work hour problem, 3.) public transportation takes longer for a single commuter alone than for a car (though quicker if everyone uses it)
Errors conceded on my part: two
1.) Bus acceleration making buses with only a couple people more trouble in traffic than cars with the same number of people
2.) Commuters from suburbs to city are outnumbered by commuters from suburbs to other places in suburbs

For Moonbear, 2 opposing points recognized as having merit:
1.) 100 people wanting to commute daily from a town would make a bus route feasible for that town
2.) Boston commuters travel farther than suburb-to-suburb commuters
3.) Park & Rides are already being used

For Chroot:
1.) Usefulness of bicycles
2.) It would be good if people could use more public transportation

For Evo:
1.) estimate of 8% of suburb-to-city commuters could feasibly use buses (a concession when you consider the number of suburb-to-city commuters there are)


As I expected, I conceded more than anyone else in the discussion. The surprise was that Moonbear came in second.

Anyway, that's the roundup.

 

[Evo]

If your information is valid, there's nothing to concede, is there?

 

[BicycleTree]

It seems to me that you were confused numerous times about the topic and your information was not always valid. Remember that the one deciding your own information is valid is you, not the most impartial of people; taking your own argument as objectively valid is naive except in math, formal logic, or exceedingly simple situations. The ability to see and accept the merit of other people's points of view is very valuable.

 

[Andy]

I hate speed limits, other road users but the things I hate the most are buses!

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

Your intent seems quite clear there. You purposely slow down to get the tailgater irritated, then once they finally decide to undertake, you gleefully (and spitefully) speed up to prevent them from getting in front of you. This is called blocking, and it's dangerous and pointless. If, as you claim, you're already keeping a safe distance from the car in front of you in the fast lane, you're now assuredly closing into an unsafe distance. So there is a contradiction in what you've been posting, and I think you're toning down your opinion because you've been rightly called on it.

There is no contradiction. While driving normally there is a certain distance that is safe to maintain. With a vehicle driving too close behind me though, while I may be safe from hitting the person in front of me, I do not have time to safely stop and be sure that the person behind me doesn't hit me. If that person were to hit me it would likely result in my vehicle colliding with the vehicle in front of me even though I would have otherwise safely prevented that with my following distance. If this were to happen, even though it was due to the unsafe driving of another driver, I would legally be responsable for the damages incurred to the vehicle in front of me, as far as California law is concerned. It is then necessary in this instance to have an inordinately large space between yourself and the vehicle in front of you so you have adequate time to stop the vehicle hopefully avoiding the rearend collision and responsability for a secondary collision. I believe I touched on this in my responses already I'm sorry that you didn't pick up on it.
So for safety reasons my slowing down is actually necessary and once the person is no longer behind me I resume a normal driving speed which naturally will mean the person who just changed lanes will have difficulty in overtaking my vehicle. Admittedly I may slow a bit more than necessary and my desire to irritate the individual is probably somewhat childish but my actions are in no way overtly wreckless in nature.
Now my original post was rather flippant about the subject but under criticism I have elaborated and become more serious about the matter. This is in no way a back track of, or in contradiction to, my original post.

 

[Curious3141]

There is no contradiction. While driving normally there is a certain distance that is safe to maintain. With a vehicle driving too close behind me though, while I may be safe from hitting the person in front of me, I do not have time to safely stop and be sure that the person behind me doesn't hit me. If that person were to hit me it would likely result in my vehicle colliding with the vehicle in front of me even though I would have otherwise safely prevented that with my following distance. If this were to happen, even though it was due to the unsafe driving of another driver, I would legally be responsable for the damages incurred to the vehicle in front of me, as far as California law is concerned. It is then necessary in this instance to have an inordinately large space between yourself and the vehicle in front of you so you have adequate time to stop the vehicle hopefully avoiding the rearend collision and responsability for a secondary collision. I believe I touched on this in my responses already I'm sorry that you didn't pick up on it.
So for safety reasons my slowing down is actually necessary and once the person is no longer behind me I resume a normal driving speed which naturally will mean the person who just changed lanes will have difficulty in overtaking my vehicle. Admittedly I may slow a bit more than necessary and my desire to irritate the individual is probably somewhat childish but my actions are in no way overtly wreckless in nature.
Now my original post was rather flippant about the subject but under criticism I have elaborated and become more serious about the matter. This is in no way a back track of, or in contradiction to, my original post.

It's "reckless", not "wreckless". Freudian slip ?

At any rate, you'd know best how safe your driving is. From what you've posted here, it doesn't seem to be the wisest, safest way to drive, but that's just my opinion (and that of some other posters).

Take care on the roads.

 

[Pre-AlgebraDude]

I can't drive yet but there is some folks that tick me and my parents off. Like if someone starts to pull out in front of you and then you start out and then stop and they start and stop and let you come and then just absolutely take off. And I hate when we get behind some tractor and it makes us late. But I especially can't stand people driving stick-shifts and talking on cell phones! This one guy I saw yesterday was driving some old 70's Ford truck that I could tell was a stick-shift because he was moving his arm, but he had the phone in his left hand and then LET GO OF THE WHEEL shifted and then started gesturing and was getting really into his conversation and almost swerved over and hit us.

Oh yeah. I hate tailgaters too. We have gotten hit countless times from someone hitting us from behind.

 

[Huckleberry]

Ever have those people on the highway that just hang behind you in the next lane. It's not really tailgating because they aren't directly behind you, but they are in a blind spot and feel very comfortable there. They just hang out for a while matching speed and then all of a sudden race forward to pass. What's up with that? Nobody in their lane and they like to sit in my blind spot.

 

[Moonbear]

Ever have those people on the highway that just hang behind you in the next lane. It's not really tailgating because they aren't directly behind you, but they are in a blind spot and feel very comfortable there. They just hang out for a while matching speed and then all of a sudden race forward to pass. What's up with that? Nobody in their lane and they like to sit in my blind spot.

I really hate them because they're always in the lane to your right when you want to get over as your exit is approaching. They stick just close enough that you can't change lanes, they're oblivious to your turn signal, you speed up and they seem to speed up, you slow down to drop behind them, and they slow down. I don't seem to get the ones who race foward to pass though, I wish they would so I could drop in behind them and get over where I want to be, but no, I get the ones who just sit there.

 

[JamesU]

8 pages and this thread still hasn't gone off topic

 

[zoobyshoe]

8 pages and this thread still hasn't gone off topic

Allow me:

My pet peeve just now is Brewnog who has aparently abandoned the "what is it" thread with 8 unconfirmed or denied guesses backed up.

 

[JamesU]

I've been waiting too...BREWNOG!

 

[brewnog]

I've been waiting too...BREWNOG!

Sorry guys, mother had just thrown a tandoori chicken pizza on the table. I had to prioritise.

 

[JamesU]

oohh..pizza

 

[zoobyshoe]

Sorry guys, mother had just thrown a tandoori chicken pizza on the table. I had to prioritise.

Unmitigated selfishness. Dog of Pavlov!

 

[Moonbear]

Sorry guys, mother had just thrown a tandoori chicken pizza on the table. I had to prioritise.

Talk about fusion cuisine! That's the oddest combination I've ever heard of!

 

[brewnog]

Talk about fusion cuisine! That's the oddest combination I've ever heard of!

I know, I used to be a pizza purist (and having been to one of the world's oldest pizzarias in Naples only helped this).

But don't knock it till you've tried it!

 

[Moonbear]

I know, I used to be a pizza purist (and having been to one of the world's oldest pizzarias in Naples only helped this).

But don't knock it till you've tried it!

Well, I like pizza and I like tandoori chicken. I never quite envisioned the two together. Do you substitute the pizza sauce with a different spicy sauce, or is it regular pizza with tandoori chicken on it? I've had chicken parmesan pizza, which is to die for if they don't overcook the chicken (no good if it gets all dried out during baking); I'm just trying to figure out the spice combination you get with tandoori chicken pizza. But, hey, if you're buying, I'll try it. I'll try any food; if I don't like it, I don't get it again (I'll usually order a "safe" dish on the side so I have food if I don't like the new one I'm trying).

 

[Huckleberry]

8 pages and this thread still hasn't gone off topic

Are you happy now?

 

[brewnog]

Well, I like pizza and I like tandoori chicken. I never quite envisioned the two together. Do you substitute the pizza sauce with a different spicy sauce, or is it regular pizza with tandoori chicken on it? I've had chicken parmesan pizza, which is to die for if they don't overcook the chicken (no good if it gets all dried out during baking); I'm just trying to figure out the spice combination you get with tandoori chicken pizza. But, hey, if you're buying, I'll try it. I'll try any food; if I don't like it, I don't get it again (I'll usually order a "safe" dish on the side so I have food if I don't like the new one I'm trying).

I think it's just normal (well, Americanized ) pizza, but with some delicious big chunks of tandoori chicken on it. It was only a supermarket thing, but I've made my own in the past and put a teaspoon of chilli powder in the sauce.

Anyway, I quite like posting recipes, so here's brewnog's special tandoori chicken:

4 chicken breasts
1 tbsp lemon juice
1 tsp salt
2 cloves garlic
1 tbsp vegetable oil
1 tsp chilli powder
2 tsp ground cumin
2 tsp ground corriander
1/2 tsp turmeric

Blitz the lot, leave to marinade for as long as possible, then bake in the hottest oven you can manage. Substituting the chicken with lamb is divine. You can also stick them on sticks and grill them.

It's really good in pitta with lots of mango chutney, lettuce, cucumber and tomatoes.

 

[Huckleberry]

A poll was taken of the highest and lowest scoring states on driver's exams. The three highest scoring states in this order were.
1. Oregon
2. Washington State
3. Iowa

And the worst,
1. Rhode Island
2. Massachusetts
3. New Jersey

Rhode Island doesn't really count because it is just a suburb of Mass. Phoenix and it's suburbs are bigger than the entire state. So I consider Rhode Island a part of Massachusetts. This means Mass takes both first and second place in the worst driving contest. Do I get some kind of a prize?

 

[Gale]

yup... mass-holes. funny though bout rhode island... new hampshire isn't much bigger... actually, i think of all of new england as one big state really... 'cept new hampshire. we're different. the rest though, one big state...