• The forum software that supports hummy.tv has been upgraded to XenForo 2.3!

    Please bear with us as we continue to tweak things, and feel free to post any questions, issues or suggestions in the upgrade thread.

Assume v. Presume

Actually, I did have a stamp album (didn't everyone?), but I never studied it and the names were a bit of a mystery. I had forgotten all about that (packets of mixed stamps of dubious origin from somewhere in Bridgenorth). I had relatives abroad so the occasional foreign stamp came my way, but I adored the UK commemorative sets. They'll be at my mum's house, somewhere! Blue Peter is to blame.
 
I've still have mine from the late 50's, I haven't checked but I remember the Swiss stamps marked with Helvetia or Helvetica.
 
It's wrongly formatted - should be 020 7437 0311. The code for London is 020, not 0207 or 0208.
Like the code for Bristol is 0117, but EVERYONE writes it as 01179 or 01173 and I think I saw 01174 the other day.
It's only been 30 years since Phone(y)day (I remember seeing a driving school on the news who had modified their cars to say 01272).
Plenty of time for the plebs to learn the rules, or not it seems.
 
Last edited:
prpr said:
EVERYONE writes is as 01179
Click to expand...
That's because Bristol (and other cities) break the number up differently from the majority of other locations. Eg Newport is 01633 ###### not 0163 3## ####. Yes, I know the 9 needs to be included in the local number.

However, the thrust of my post 4743 was LICENSE, which should be LICENCE because it's the noun not the verb, and is unusual because the mistake is usually the other way around (whereas in the USA they use LICENCE regardless of whether it's a verb or a noun).
 
prpr said:
It's wrongly formatted - should be 020 7437 0311. The code for London is 020, not 0207 or 0208.
Like the code for Bristol is 0117, but EVERYONE writes it as 01179 or 01173 and I think I saw 01174 the other day.
It's only been 30 years since Phone(y)day (I remember seeing a driving school on the news who had modified their cars to say 01272).
Plenty of time for the plebs to learn the rules, or not it seems.
Click to expand...
I wasn't aware of the 020 "rule". That would seem to go against the old format for London. 01 584 7011 (ITA/IBA). It does annoy me seeing Nottingham numbers displayed as 01159 xxx xxx or 01159 xxxxxx when it should be 0115 9xx xxxx.
Then there is the confusion with mobile numbers. EVERYONE (except me) writes 07436 xxx xxx or 07436 xxxxxx. I follow the previous "rule" and put 0743 6xx xxxx.
Black Hole said:
However, the thrust of my post 4743 was LICENSE, which should be LICENCE
Click to expand...
I thought it was. But as you say there is a lot of confusion even on British websites referring to the licence. :rolleyes:
 
EEPhil said:
I wasn't aware of the 020 "rule". That would seem to go against the old format for London. 01 584 7011
Click to expand...
It's not a "rule", it's a rule.
The whole point of the change of code (from 0171 and 0181 to 020) was to expand local numbers from 7 digits to 8 (rather than just for the sake of it!), so the format did have to change to match. There is absolutely no point changing 0171 to 0207 and 0181 to 0208 and everything else remaining the same.
It does annoy me seeing Nottingham numbers displayed as 01159 xxx xxx or 01159 xxxxxx when it should be 0115 9xx xxxx.
Click to expand...
Same as previously described for Bristol, and also applied to Leeds, Sheffield, Leicester and Reading - the change was to expand local numbers from 6 to 7 digits, so e.g. 0602 234567 would have become 0115 923 4567, and not 01159 234567.
Then there is the confusion with mobile numbers. EVERYONE (except me) writes 07436 xxx xxx or 07436 xxxxxx. I follow the previous "rule" and put 0743 6xx xxxx
Click to expand...
They are right and you are wrong I'm afraid. Mobile numbers went from e.g. 0831 456789 to 07831 456789 at some point.
 
EEPhil said:
EVERYONE (except me) writes 07436 xxx xxx or 07436 xxxxxx. I follow the previous "rule" and put 0743 6xx xxxx.
Click to expand...
Not everyone. My mobile number is "abcabcabcdb". Formatting it "abc abc abc db" makes it easy to remember, eg, when on the side of a vehicle, which was it's original use for me.
When I give it to someone on the phone who then reads it back (from their screen I assume) as "abca bcab cdb", or the like, I have no idea if they have it right ... I just say "OK" 🙂

Anyway, how can anyone say that a string of numbers with no spaces in it HAS to have spaces added in a specific format? I call BS.
 
prpr said:
They are right and you are wrong I'm afraid. Mobile numbers went from e.g. 0831 456789 to 07831 456789 at some point.
Click to expand...
I don’t doubt that, but I find the 4-3-4 format easier to remember. Therefore when I read out the number I pause for breath (and thinking time) between groups and so it comes out in that format. Just unfortunate the same happens when I write it down.:D
 
The different ways of breaking up a phone number might well have an engineering rationality derived from which part constitutes the "STD code" and can be omitted from local calls, but it expects ordinary people to have an unlikely degree of understanding and to be able to remember where to put the spaces. It was always far more likely the typical person would use their own local spacing universally.
 
Prompted by a crossword clue in yesterday's Mail, I was investigating when "deluxe" ceased to be two words and came across this:

M-W gives it solely as deluxe.
AHD prefers deluxe, but lists de luxe as a variant.
OED Online: ||de luxe [Fr., lit. �of luxury�.]

Luxurious, sumptuous; of a superior kind.

1819 Edition de luxe [see LUXE 2]. 1865 �OUIDA� Strathmore viii, I wonder
governments don't tax good talk; it's quite a luxury, and they might add de luxe. 1885
Edition de luxe [see LUXE 2]. 1890 Trains de luxe [see LUXE 2]. 1908 Westm. Gaz. 6
June 5/1 We are conscious of something De luxe, but not oppressed by the sense of it.
1934 Punch 20 June 679/3 They will disclose Britannia, enthroned on the top of a de
luxe model of one of those erections from which they mend tram-wires. 1949 E. POUND
Pisan Cantos lxxvii. 52 Before the deluxe car carried him over the precipice. 1955 T. H.
PEAR Eng. Social Differences viii. 182 Members of the upper economic strata..who
patronise hotels de luxe. 1970 K. CHESNEY Victorian Underworld 336 These places
were often little businesses engaged in a de luxe trade, glovers, bonnet makers, perfumers
and so on.

so perhaps we have Ezra Pound to thank for the concatenation? and using capitalization seems to be ostentatious in the extreme, along the same lines as dining at the American Grille.
Click to expand...

:eek:
 
EEPhil said:
I don’t doubt that, but I find the 4-3-4 format easier to remember. Therefore when I read out the number I pause for breath (and thinking time) between groups and so it comes out in that format. Just unfortunate the same happens when I write it down.:D
Click to expand...
I usually split up phone numbers in groupings of a mix of two, three or four depending on the pattern of the digits. You don't have to be an Einstein(*) to find patterns that roll most easily off the tongue.

(*) Of course, as everyone knows, Einstein was not that good a mathematician but was a very good visualiser of the problem he was trying to get to grips with.
 
Read: verb, to scan text. Past participle read.

Lead: verb, to initiate action. Past participle led.

No wonder I make slip-ups with spelling from time to time!
 
Thursday afternoon, Inside Science on Radio 4: Discussing aerosols but saying (repeatedly) saying arseholes. :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top