Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
Croxley Rail Link "Exhibition" dates
Basil Jet wrote:
On 2011\05\12 02:30, Free Lunch wrote: On Wed, 11 May 2011 08:44:59 +0100, Chris (ukonline really) wrote in misc.transport.urban-transit: Free Lunch wrote: On Tue, 10 May 2011 23:06:08 +0100, Chris (ukonline really) wrote in misc.transport.urban-transit: 1506 wrote: If I told my neighbrs in Washoe County, Nevada that I grew up in Buckinghamshire they would not relate that to a county, "Shire" is obscure in North America. It briefly comes to the fore every four years at the start of the Presidential race. It may be smaller than some US counties, but no one thinks of the (clearly misnamed) New Hampshire as a county. Not suggesting they do, just suggesting that "shire", as relating to a place is not obscure. Why is it "clearly misnamed", BTW? Because it's not just a county, it's a state. At least it isn't New Yorkshire. But it is New England! Quite. In context, it's a sub-unit of New England. Looked at like that, US counties are not equivalent to UK counties, but rather to UK hundreds and wapentakes. -- ..sig down for maintenance |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
Croxley Rail Link "Exhibition" dates
On 11/05/2011 23:09, Bruce wrote:
Tom wrote: On Tue, 10 May 2011, Free Lunch wrote: It may be smaller than some US counties, but no one thinks of the (clearly misnamed) New Hampshire as a county. Seems alright to me. The real problem round there is that the city of New York isn't in the state of New Yorkshire. "York, York, so good they named it twice ..." No, it definitely doesn't sound as good. ;-) It was named after the Duke of York, not Yorkshire, -- Myth, after all, is what we believe naturally. History is what we must painfully learn and struggle to remember. -Albert Goldman |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
Croxley Rail Link "Exhibition" dates
On Wed, 11 May 2011, Bruce wrote:
Tom Anderson wrote: On Tue, 10 May 2011, Free Lunch wrote: It may be smaller than some US counties, but no one thinks of the (clearly misnamed) New Hampshire as a county. Seems alright to me. The real problem round there is that the city of New York isn't in the state of New Yorkshire. "York, York, so good they named it twice ..." No, it definitely doesn't sound as good. ;-) It does have five boroughs, though! tom -- Meten is Weten. |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
Croxley Rail Link "Exhibition" dates
On Thu, 12 May 2011, Chris Tolley wrote:
Basil Jet wrote: On 2011\05\12 02:30, Free Lunch wrote: On Wed, 11 May 2011 08:44:59 +0100, Chris (ukonline really) wrote in misc.transport.urban-transit: Free Lunch wrote: On Tue, 10 May 2011 23:06:08 +0100, Chris (ukonline really) wrote in misc.transport.urban-transit: 1506 wrote: If I told my neighbrs in Washoe County, Nevada that I grew up in Buckinghamshire they would not relate that to a county, "Shire" is obscure in North America. It briefly comes to the fore every four years at the start of the Presidential race. It may be smaller than some US counties, but no one thinks of the (clearly misnamed) New Hampshire as a county. Not suggesting they do, just suggesting that "shire", as relating to a place is not obscure. Why is it "clearly misnamed", BTW? Because it's not just a county, it's a state. At least it isn't New Yorkshire. But it is New England! Quite. In context, it's a sub-unit of New England. Well, except that New York state isn't considered a part of New England. The northeast, but not New England. Looked at like that, US counties are not equivalent to UK counties, but rather to UK hundreds and wapentakes. Oh, definitely. Any American would tell you that. tom -- Meten is Weten. |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
Croxley Rail Link "Exhibition" dates
Tom Anderson wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2011, Chris Tolley wrote: Looked at like that, US counties are not equivalent to UK counties, but rather to UK hundreds and wapentakes. Oh, definitely. Any American would tell you that. ;-) -- ..sig down for maintenance |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
Croxley Rail Link "Exhibition" dates
On 11/05/2011 11:51, Nick Leverton wrote:
They left from Plymouth on about the third attempt, having had to turn back. Their first attempt did leave the UK from Southampton, as Graeme recalled, the settlers having originally come from Nottinghamshire via the Netherlands (source: Dodgypedia). Their first attempt to leave the country was to depart from Lincolnshire for the Netherlands, but they were arrested and imprisoned in Boston (Lincolnshire). You can visit the cells where they are believed to have been imprisoned http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_Guildhall There is a Pilgrim Fathers memorial near Boston http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilgrim_Fathers_Memorial -- Jeremy Double {real address, include nospam} Rail and transport photos at http://www.flickr.com/photos/jmdoubl...7603834894248/ |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Croxley Rail Link "Exhibition" dates | London Transport | |||
Croxley Rail Link "Exhibition" dates | London Transport | |||
Croxley Rail Link Petition | London Transport | |||
CROXLEY RAIL LINK - POSITION UPDATE - February 2007 | London Transport | |||
Future is bleak for Croxley Rail Link | London Transport |