On 24 Aug 2009 14:20:11 GMT, Adrian  wrote:

>Tom Crispin <kije.remove@this.bit.freeuk.com.munge> gurgled happily,
>sounding much like they were saying:
>
>>>Catford is in Lewisham.
>
>> No.  Catford is in the London Borough of Lewisham, it is *not* in
>> Lewisham.
>
>lewisham.gov.uk doesn't exactly shout about "London Borough Of", does it?

OK - we could say that there are 15 railway stations in Lewisham, but
that doesn't imply that there are 15 railway stations called Lewisham
Station (indeed, there is only one).  Catford Railway Station is in
Catford, Catford Bridge Railway Station is also in Catford, however,
unsurprisingly, Deptford Railway Station is not in Catford, neither is
Lewisham Railway Station.

Most intelligent people are able to accept that abbreviating the whole
of the London Borough of Lewisham to Lewisham is perfectly acceptable
when talking about the entire borough, but it does not imply that
someone living in Catford lives in Lewisham - it implies that they
live in Catford.

Tom Crispin wrote:
>
> 
> Most intelligent people are able to accept that abbreviating the whole
> of the London Borough of Lewisham to Lewisham is perfectly acceptable
> when talking about the entire borough, but it does not imply that
> someone living in Catford lives in Lewisham - it implies that they
> live in Catford.


nope, if I'm told 'Lewisham' I'd not expect to have to go to Catford.
Holborn is not Camden.
Leather Lane market is not Camden Market.

-- 

Come to Dave & Boris - your cycle security experts.

On Mon, 24 Aug 2009 16:58:03 +0100, %steve%@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth)
wrote:

>Tom Crispin <kije.remove@this.bit.freeuk.com.munge> wrote:
>
>> Most intelligent people are able to accept that abbreviating the whole
>> of the London Borough of Lewisham to Lewisham is perfectly acceptable
>> when talking about the entire borough, but it does not imply that
>> someone living in Catford lives in Lewisham - it implies that they
>> live in Catford.
>
>So according to you, and drawing upon your previous example, people who
>live in York do not live in Yorkshire?

That is not what I said.

All people who live in Lewisham live in the London Borough of
Lewisham.  Not all people who live in the London Borough of Lewisham
live in Lewisham.

>I think you're using a different variant of the word "intelligent" from
>that in just about every dictionary I have seen.

A lack of "intelligence" seems to fit perfectly those who repeatedly
make false assumptions after being given clear guidance.  You, for
example.

Tom Crispin <kije.remove@this.bit.freeuk.com.munge> writes:

> All people who live in Lewisham live in the London Borough of
> Lewisham.  Not all people who live in the London Borough of Lewisham
> live in Lewisham.

But what about the barbers who shave the barbers that do not shave
themselves?


-dan

Daniel Barlow wrote:
> Tom Crispin <kije.remove@this.bit.freeuk.com.munge> writes:
> 
>> All people who live in Lewisham live in the London Borough of
>> Lewisham.  Not all people who live in the London Borough of Lewisham
>> live in Lewisham.
> 
> But what about the barbers who shave the barbers that do not shave
> themselves?
> 

Stop now or you'll end up destroying any hope of a cycling group based 
on axioms.

Daniel Barlow wrote:
> Tom Crispin <kije.remove@this.bit.freeuk.com.munge> writes:
> 
>> All people who live in Lewisham live in the London Borough of
>> Lewisham.  Not all people who live in the London Borough of Lewisham
>> live in Lewisham.
> 
> But what about the barbers who shave the barbers that do not shave
> themselves?
> 
> 
> -dan

That's thier wives wot does the shaving, then.

-- 

Come to Dave & Boris - your cycle security experts.

Nick wrote:

>>
> 
> Stop now or you'll end up destroying any hope of a cycling group based 
> on axioms.

It's all quantum to me, anyway

-- 

Come to Dave & Boris - your cycle security experts.

Keitht wrote:

> Tom Crispin wrote:

>> Most intelligent people are able to accept that abbreviating the whole
>> of the London Borough of Lewisham to Lewisham is perfectly acceptable
>> when talking about the entire borough, but it does not imply that
>> someone living in Catford lives in Lewisham - it implies that they
>> live in Catford.

> nope, if I'm told 'Lewisham' I'd not expect to have to go to Catford.

That's a different context.

> Holborn is not Camden.

I'm not so sure about that.

The geographical area which gave the LB its name is always referred to as 
"Camden Town", as are other places in the area with similarly-derived names 
(eg, Somers Town, Agar Town).

Holborn *is* [part of/in] Camden in the only commonly-understood way in which 
the term "Camden" is used unadorned.

> Leather Lane market is not Camden Market.

That's because Camden Town and Holborn were only the subject of a shotgun 
wedding in the mid-sixties, whereas all these place names are a couple of 
centuries old (or thereabouts).

JNugent wrote:
> Keitht wrote:
>
>> Tom Crispin wrote:
>
>>> Most intelligent people are able to accept that abbreviating the
>>> whole of the London Borough of Lewisham to Lewisham is perfectly
>>> acceptable when talking about the entire borough, but it does not
>>> imply that someone living in Catford lives in Lewisham - it implies
>>> that they live in Catford.
>
>> nope, if I'm told 'Lewisham' I'd not expect to have to go to Catford.
>
> That's a different context.
>
>> Holborn is not Camden.
>
> I'm not so sure about that.
>
> The geographical area which gave the LB its name is always referred
> to as "Camden Town", as are other places in the area with
> similarly-derived names (eg, Somers Town, Agar Town).
>
> Holborn *is* [part of/in] Camden in the only commonly-understood way
> in which the term "Camden" is used unadorned.

Having lived there briefly (a long time ago and not by choice) When someone 
mentions "Camden" I think of Camden Town, certainly not Holborn nor any of 
the other far-flung reaches of the Borough.

>> Leather Lane market is not Camden Market.
>
> That's because Camden Town and Holborn were only the subject of a
> shotgun wedding in the mid-sixties, whereas all these place names are
> a couple of centuries old (or thereabouts).

Camden Town is also a couple of centuries old.

http://www.camdentown.co.uk/camden7.htm

Brimstone wrote:
> JNugent wrote:
>> Keitht wrote:
>>
>>> Tom Crispin wrote:
>>>> Most intelligent people are able to accept that abbreviating the
>>>> whole of the London Borough of Lewisham to Lewisham is perfectly
>>>> acceptable when talking about the entire borough, but it does not
>>>> imply that someone living in Catford lives in Lewisham - it implies
>>>> that they live in Catford.
>>> nope, if I'm told 'Lewisham' I'd not expect to have to go to Catford.

>> That's a different context.

>>> Holborn is not Camden.

>> I'm not so sure about that.
>> The geographical area which gave the LB its name is always referred
>> to as "Camden Town", as are other places in the area with
>> similarly-derived names (eg, Somers Town, Agar Town).
>> Holborn *is* [part of/in] Camden in the only commonly-understood way
>> in which the term "Camden" is used unadorned.

> Having lived there briefly (a long time ago and not by choice) When someone 
> mentions "Camden" I think of Camden Town, certainly not Holborn nor any of 
> the other far-flung reaches of the Borough.

So do I, though I usually manage to conjure up a mind's eye picture of 
Hampstead as well.

>>> Leather Lane market is not Camden Market.

>> That's because Camden Town and Holborn were only the subject of a
>> shotgun wedding in the mid-sixties, whereas all these place names are
>> a couple of centuries old (or thereabouts).

> Camden Town is also a couple of centuries old.
> http://www.camdentown.co.uk/camden7.htm

I know. I said so.