Subject:
|
Re: "Graham Rawle's Lost Consonants"
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general, lugnet.loc.uk
|
Date:
|
Mon, 15 May 2000 13:39:07 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1140 times
|
| |
|
|
"Fredrik Glöckner" wrote:
>
> "Scott A" <s.arthur@hw.ac.uk> writes:
>
> > "Graham Rawle's Lost Consonants" is a weekly item in a newspaper I read.
> > Each week a sentence is given, and GR removes a consonant to show how it can
> > changes the meaning. Sometimes he can be quite funny, and sometimes not
> > (although my kids find him funny most weeks). This week it featured Lego:
> >
> > http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=4381
>
> I really liked this one. Really funny stuff, although one shouldn't
> write "lego" when one means "LEGO brand building bricks", as the
> illustration suggests! ;-)
That's a matter of some controversy...in _50 Years of Play_, a book
written by Lego System A/S, Denmark...the text reads:
"The name LEGO was formed from the Danish words "Leg godt", meaning
"Paly well". The company and its toys were thereafter called LEGO."
Now, this book was published in 1982, and TLC may since have decided
that "LEGO" is a brand rather than a product...but at least at one time
it was considered to be both. I think it is perfectly ok to refer to
the bricks as "LEGO," but not "legos"...I still shudder when I think of
the beatings Susan Williams used to give me when I uttered that word. :)
--
Thomas Main
main@appstate.edu
>
> It's also funny in the pretext of some AFOL's around here having a large
> ego! (No offense, anyone.)
>
> Fredrik
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
4 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
