Re: Continental vs British toilets
- From: whheydt@xxxxxxxxxxx (Wilson Heydt)
- Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 16:13:53 GMT
In article <433d2e46.1584033@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Jonathan L Cunningham <spam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 22:50:03 GMT, djheydt@xxxxxxxxxxx (Dorothy J
>Heydt) wrote:
>
>>In article <t5goj19ijb2khlbhu5jua6nfug26s5570e@xxxxxxx>,
>>Marilee J. Layman <mjlayman@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 06:39:48 +0200, Irina Rempt <irina@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>Wilson Heydt wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "Ells" varied all over the place, too. usually as a cloth measure.
>>>>
>>>>I have the 'royal ell' as more-or-less standard measure in the WIS: the
>
>>>I thought an ell was from the tip of your front-facing nose to to the
>>>tip of your sideways-extended arm. Going by this definition, the MJL
>>>is 4.67 feet.
>
>>An ell is supposed to be 18 inches and is supposed to be from the
>>end of your thumb to your elbow, if you're a largish man with
>>longish arms. Hence the word "elbow," compare German
>>"Ellenbogen," "ell-bend."
>
>I thought that was a cubit?
So far as I know, it is. Different cultural derivation, though.
--
Hal Heydt
Albany, CA
My dime, my opinions.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Continental vs British toilets
- From: Joann Zimmerman
- Re: Continental vs British toilets
- References:
- Re: Continental vs British toilets
- From: Marilee J . Layman
- Re: Continental vs British toilets
- From: Jonathan L Cunningham
- Re: Continental vs British toilets
- Prev by Date: Re: Continental vs British toilets
- Next by Date: Re: Whatever Happened to Pocket Calculators?
- Previous by thread: Re: Continental vs British toilets
- Next by thread: Re: Continental vs British toilets
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|