Location: Half inch above the K/T boundary Gender:
Posted:
Mar 28, 2013 - 2:17pm
oldviolin wrote:
Usage notes
'Git' is usually used as an insult, more severe than twit but less severe than a true profanity like wanker or arsehole, and may often be used affectionately between friends. 'Get' can also be used, with a subtle change of meaning. 'You cheeky get!' is slightly less harsh than 'You cheeky git!'.
'Git' is frequently used in conjunction with another word to achieve a more specific meaning. For instance a "smarmy git" refers to a person of a slimy, ingratiating disposition; a "jammy git" would be a person with undeserved luck. The phrase "grumpy old git", denoting a cantankerous old man, is used with particular frequency.
In parts of northern England, Northern Ireland and Scotland, 'get' is still used in preference to 'git'.
The word has been ruled by the Speaker of the House of Commons to be unparliamentary language.
/wiki
I am OK w/this 'til bullet point four. "Git" is likeable way to call someone a twit, or worse. I suggest you lead a movement to have it used more frequently (in context of course) on RP. It will then inevitably spread through our general culture. It certainly should be used in our US Congress! frequently, imo.
'Git' is usually used as an insult, more severe than twit but less severe than a true profanity like wanker or arsehole, and may often be used affectionately between friends. 'Get' can also be used, with a subtle change of meaning. 'You cheeky get!' is slightly less harsh than 'You cheeky git!'.
'Git' is frequently used in conjunction with another word to achieve a more specific meaning. For instance a "smarmy git" refers to a person of a slimy, ingratiating disposition; a "jammy git" would be a person with undeserved luck. The phrase "grumpy old git", denoting a cantankerous old man, is used with particular frequency.
In parts of northern England, Northern Ireland and Scotland, 'get' is still used in preference to 'git'.
The word has been ruled by the Speaker of the House of Commons to be unparliamentary language.
This post apparently contained an image that was dragged into the post editor. Sorry, but any text contained in the post after this point has been lost.
The Plan to Bring the Iconic Passenger Pigeon Back From Extinction
Twelve birds lie belly-up in a wooden drawer at the Berkeley Museum of Vertebrate Zoology. Bloated with stuffing, their ruddy brown chests resemble a row of sweet potatoes. Slate-blue heads and thin white tails protrude in perfect alignment, except for one bird that cranes its neck to face its neighbor. A pea-sized bulge of white cotton sits where its eye should be. A slip of paper tied to its foot reads, “Ectopistes migratorius. Manitoba. 1884.” This is the passenger pigeon, once the most abundant bird in North America. When Europeans first landed on the continent, they encountered billions of the birds. By 1914 they were extinct.
That may be about to change. Today scientists are meeting in Washington, D.C. to discuss a plan to bring the passenger pigeon back from extinction. The technical challenges are immense, and the ethical questions are slippery. But as genetic technology races ahead, a scenario that’s hard to imagine is becoming harder to dismiss out of hand.
