How about marmite? It doesn't only spread on English toast...it spreads well on a Scottish bannock too.
English spreads
Aye, Guest...I'm frae Scotland....how observant you are. Strictly speaking, I should say that Gaelic is my native Language, but as with the vast majority of Scots...about 95%.....my knowledge of Gaelic is about zero, apart from a few basic words. Much more to the point would be Scots, the dialect understood and spoken colloquially by far more people in most of Scotland. For true native born Gaelic speakers you have to go to the far west and north west of Scotland, especially to the Western Isles where Gaelic is still the first Language for a fair number of people. Stroll the streets of Stornoway and you'll hear Gaelic being spoken more or less on a par with English.
Here in Edinburgh you are far, far, far more likely to hear most of the other European Languages being spoken in the streets than you are Gaelic.
Here in Edinburgh you are far, far, far more likely to hear most of the other European Languages being spoken in the streets than you are Gaelic.
<Since 1815, the last two world economic and military superpowers in succession have both been English-speaking.>
I though it was abit earlier. Even because the beginning of the USA of 1776 Britain was a superpower.
I though it was abit earlier. Even because the beginning of the USA of 1776 Britain was a superpower.
<Some people only see what they want to see. >
I think Sander is very jealous ! he denies the Massive Latin influence on other cultures ! It’s so funny that ,all the ex-lingua franca, were more than 50 % LATIN : French, Spanish, English
Sander , you must be culturally blind ! Quit smoking weed !
I think Sander is very jealous ! he denies the Massive Latin influence on other cultures ! It’s so funny that ,all the ex-lingua franca, were more than 50 % LATIN : French, Spanish, English
Sander , you must be culturally blind ! Quit smoking weed !
"I though it was abit earlier. Even because the beginning of the USA of 1776 Britain was a superpower."
Yes, but France was still a global rival.
That ended definitively in 1815 after the Battle of Waterloo.
Yes, but France was still a global rival.
That ended definitively in 1815 after the Battle of Waterloo.
"I think Sander is very jealous ! he denies the Massive Latin influence on other cultures ! It’s so funny that ,all the ex-lingua franca, were more than 50 % LATIN : French, Spanish, English "
Again, I ask, Where do you think Latin came from? Was it a completely new language?I assume it wasn't plucked from the air or maybe I'm wrong, please tell me. By the way, I'm not French, Spanish, or English, peter.
Again, I ask, Where do you think Latin came from? Was it a completely new language?I assume it wasn't plucked from the air or maybe I'm wrong, please tell me. By the way, I'm not French, Spanish, or English, peter.
"Where do you think Latin came from? Was it a completely new language?"
Yes it was.
Yes it was.
So it's safe to conclude it's the same Damian roaming around Scotland between messages.
I think it's very ironic that when French people travel on the Eurostar train from Paris to London, the rail terminus they arrive at in London is called Waterloo. At the moment anyway, as very soon a new terminus for Eurostar will be opened in another part of London which is just as well.
<Yes, but France was still a global rival.
That ended definitively in 1815 after the Battle of Waterloo. >
Their approach to been a global power was quite different from Britan.
Heres a quote about British and French approach to colonization in West Africa.
<The purpose of colonial possessions in West Africa was a topic hotly discussed in both metropolitan Britain and France - especially since these possessions in 1900 provided neither historical legitimacy nor trade links. Were African colonies acquired for economic speculation, or were there further imperatives which demanded occupation?
For the British, Lord Salisbury was certain that ‘The colonial policy of Great Britain and France in West Africa has been widely different’, contrasting French expansion by ‘large and constant expenditure, and by a succession of military expeditions’ with Britain’s ‘policy of advance by commercial enterprise.’2 The Manchester Guardian went further to say that: ‘It is not the habit of the English people to set out with their eyes open on a career of conquest and annexation. The conquests which we make are forced upon us.’3 French commentators generally agreed with them: in the words of Jules Blois in 1903 ‘The Englishman hasn’t the false pretension to be loved; he wishes to be comfortable and to “make money”. His goal has been attained.’4
French colonial theorists did not see colonies in quite such nakedly economic terms. Gabriel Charmes, a prominent journalist of the Third Republic, wrote before the French conquest that ‘If in these immense regions where only fanaticism and brigandage reign today, France were to bring - even at the price of spilled blood - peace, commerce, tolerance, who could say this was a poor use of force? Having taught millions of men civilisation, freedom would fill it with the pride that makes great peoples.5 This attitude was unchanged by the end of the colonial period, with Charles de Gaulle admitting in 1961 ‘We have made colonies and colonised, we do not blush, for without us these countries would not have had the good fortune to know humanity.’6 >
That ended definitively in 1815 after the Battle of Waterloo. >
Their approach to been a global power was quite different from Britan.
Heres a quote about British and French approach to colonization in West Africa.
<The purpose of colonial possessions in West Africa was a topic hotly discussed in both metropolitan Britain and France - especially since these possessions in 1900 provided neither historical legitimacy nor trade links. Were African colonies acquired for economic speculation, or were there further imperatives which demanded occupation?
For the British, Lord Salisbury was certain that ‘The colonial policy of Great Britain and France in West Africa has been widely different’, contrasting French expansion by ‘large and constant expenditure, and by a succession of military expeditions’ with Britain’s ‘policy of advance by commercial enterprise.’2 The Manchester Guardian went further to say that: ‘It is not the habit of the English people to set out with their eyes open on a career of conquest and annexation. The conquests which we make are forced upon us.’3 French commentators generally agreed with them: in the words of Jules Blois in 1903 ‘The Englishman hasn’t the false pretension to be loved; he wishes to be comfortable and to “make money”. His goal has been attained.’4
French colonial theorists did not see colonies in quite such nakedly economic terms. Gabriel Charmes, a prominent journalist of the Third Republic, wrote before the French conquest that ‘If in these immense regions where only fanaticism and brigandage reign today, France were to bring - even at the price of spilled blood - peace, commerce, tolerance, who could say this was a poor use of force? Having taught millions of men civilisation, freedom would fill it with the pride that makes great peoples.5 This attitude was unchanged by the end of the colonial period, with Charles de Gaulle admitting in 1961 ‘We have made colonies and colonised, we do not blush, for without us these countries would not have had the good fortune to know humanity.’6 >
**So it's safe to conclude it's the same Damian roaming around Scotland between messages**
Aye, a very safe conclusion. Mr Guest (or Miss Guest or Ms Guest?) Only thing is.....I'm rooted firmly to the spot all the while. Same location....different handles.
Aye, a very safe conclusion. Mr Guest (or Miss Guest or Ms Guest?) Only thing is.....I'm rooted firmly to the spot all the while. Same location....different handles.
<I think it's very ironic that when French people travel on the Eurostar train from Paris to London, the rail terminus they arrive at in London is called Waterloo.>
See the red faces of the French as they arrive at Waterloo station. Jeez at least they could of develop a new station or rename the damn thing to something more 'Anti-French'. Wow is this how we welcome people?
Who knows? We build a new Airport and call it 'Kosovo' to welcome our Serbian guests?
See the red faces of the French as they arrive at Waterloo station. Jeez at least they could of develop a new station or rename the damn thing to something more 'Anti-French'. Wow is this how we welcome people?
Who knows? We build a new Airport and call it 'Kosovo' to welcome our Serbian guests?
I don't see Waterloo Station as any more an affront than Gare d'Austerlitz.
Surely there's a common sense statute of limitations on past history...
Surely there's a common sense statute of limitations on past history...