On 2013-11-10 09:18:26 +0000, Nick Maclaren said:

In article ,
Sacha wrote:

There is quite a large number of people in UK who grow Fuchsias as
tender plants for a hobby and it is a country-wide interest, though it
has diminished in the last few years. But those people are spread all
over Britain, so the word 'Fuchsia' was hardly confined to a small
area. To this day, we get people ringing or writing and asking for
some slightly obscure and not entirely successful plant. It seems
that your childhood was exceptional in many ways but the word 'Fuchsia'
is certainly not known only in the balmy south.

Please don't be ridiculous. I never said that it was and, in
fact, they are nowadays common in hanging baskets. The issue
was whether all children would have learnt the word by the time
they start learning another language. And, given the fact that
most people in this country live in cities and a large number
have no interest in plants or gardening, that is debatable.
It wouldn't surprise me if half the population of this country
didn't know the word.

Dammit, there was a 'survey' a while back where primary school
children were asked to name half a dozen flowers (ANY flowers)
and quite a lot of them got stuck.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

And please don't be so rude. Extending a 'conversation' along natural
byways is hardly 'ridiculous'. The subject is hardly one of
earth-shattering importance but you're making an enormous issue out of
it.
--
Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.com
South Devon

In article ,
sacha wrote:

And please don't be so rude. Extending a 'conversation' along natural
byways is hardly 'ridiculous'. The subject is hardly one of
earth-shattering importance but you're making an enormous issue out of
it.

The reason that I was doing so is that your postings were implying
that I did not know those facts, and that they negated my point;
i.e. that you were misrepresenting me, despite my explanations,
and I regard that as rude.

Shall we let this one drop? I apologise for the tone of my posting.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

On 2013-11-10 12:29:20 +0000, Nick Maclaren said:

In article ,
sacha wrote:

And please don't be so rude. Extending a 'conversation' along natural
byways is hardly 'ridiculous'. The subject is hardly one of
earth-shattering importance but you're making an enormous issue out of
it.

The reason that I was doing so is that your postings were implying
that I did not know those facts, and that they negated my point;
i.e. that you were misrepresenting me, despite my explanations,
and I regard that as rude.

Shall we let this one drop? I apologise for the tone of my posting.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

Mt goodness, Nick, I'm really horrified that you thought I was implying
you were lying. Certainly not, I assure you!
--

Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.com
South Devon
www.helpforheroes.org.uk

In article ,
Sacha wrote:

And please don't be so rude. Extending a 'conversation' along natural
byways is hardly 'ridiculous'. The subject is hardly one of
earth-shattering importance but you're making an enormous issue out of
it.

The reason that I was doing so is that your postings were implying
that I did not know those facts, and that they negated my point;
i.e. that you were misrepresenting me, despite my explanations,
and I regard that as rude.

Shall we let this one drop? I apologise for the tone of my posting.

Mt goodness, Nick, I'm really horrified that you thought I was implying
you were lying. Certainly not, I assure you!

No, I didn't think THAT!


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.