This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Just a little Poll, if you would like to join in.
If you say Peak when referring to the Peak district, then post "Peak" only.
If you say Peaks when referring to the Peak district, then post "Peaks" only.
Thanks.
If you say Peak when referring to the Peak district, then post "Peak" only.
If you say Peaks when referring to the Peak district, then post "Peaks" only.
Thanks.
In reply to karl walton:
A troll rather than a poll. Or should we have a poll to decide whether your name should be 'Karl' or 'Karls'?
A troll rather than a poll. Or should we have a poll to decide whether your name should be 'Karl' or 'Karls'?
In reply to karl walton:
Peak
Peak
In reply to Removed User:
Peaks
Peaks
In reply to Removed User: Peak :¬D
In reply to Gordon Stainforth:
is that a vote for "Peak" then?
> (In reply to karl walton)
>
> A troll rather than a poll. Or should we have a poll to decide whether your name should be 'Karl' or 'Karls'?
>
> A troll rather than a poll. Or should we have a poll to decide whether your name should be 'Karl' or 'Karls'?
is that a vote for "Peak" then?
In reply to elephant0907:
It's the peak district as it was named after the people who lived there. So surely it's ok to say peak's as it's the possesive term.
It's the peak district as it was named after the people who lived there. So surely it's ok to say peak's as it's the possesive term.
In reply to karl walton:
after all, it is the peak district and not the peaks district! the latter sounds simply awful
after all, it is the peak district and not the peaks district! the latter sounds simply awful
In reply to dissonance:
I'm not going to vote for an existing name, no.
Steve voted for Pique; similarly, if I were to make any comment at all it would be Pathetique.
> (In reply to Gordon Stainforth)
> [...]
>
> is that a vote for "Peak" then?
> [...]
>
> is that a vote for "Peak" then?
I'm not going to vote for an existing name, no.
Steve voted for Pique; similarly, if I were to make any comment at all it would be Pathetique.
In reply to stomach: There is no vote, just a question of whether you are accurate or inaccurate, do you choose to be stupid and misinformed or correct, what has a vote got to do with it?
Its like saying should we change the name of Great Britain to Great Britains, or Sheffield to Sheffields, Exeter to Exeters etc etc. Will you all stop being stupid, its PEAK, typos I can accept, deliberate corruptions are unacceptable after it has been pointed out to you.
There is no vote.
Its like saying should we change the name of Great Britain to Great Britains, or Sheffield to Sheffields, Exeter to Exeters etc etc. Will you all stop being stupid, its PEAK, typos I can accept, deliberate corruptions are unacceptable after it has been pointed out to you.
There is no vote.
1
In reply to Al Evans:
I was only saying what I say! Which is 'Iam off to the Peaks'
Similarly I say 'Iam off to the Lakes'
to be honest though, When Iam going to 'that' area, I tend to say Peak District anyway! :0)
I was only saying what I say! Which is 'Iam off to the Peaks'
Similarly I say 'Iam off to the Lakes'
to be honest though, When Iam going to 'that' area, I tend to say Peak District anyway! :0)
In reply to karl walton:
What is the poll to determine? Are you trying to find out how many idiots will post "Peaks" even after you have identified the area as the PEAK district?
Or is your poll fashioned to ensnare pedants, anal retentives and general arse-wipes?
What is the poll to determine? Are you trying to find out how many idiots will post "Peaks" even after you have identified the area as the PEAK district?
Or is your poll fashioned to ensnare pedants, anal retentives and general arse-wipes?
In reply to Fishtrumpet:
I guess that covers me, so why do I do it and get all the abuse, because I care about heritage, and I care about the beautiful areas we climb and walk in , and I care about them getting the respect they deserve and a starting point is giving them their correct name.
The Lakes is 'The Lakes' cos thats what it is. The bulk of the High Peak is taken up by the huge plateaus that are Kinder and Bleaklow, two of the last great wilderness areas south of the border, perhaps only equalled by Dartmoor ( never Dartmoors).
Certainly not Peaks and certainly not why the area is called the PEAK district.
The rest of the Peak is mostly moorland and small limestone hills and valleys, peaks have nothing to do with its name. I just wish visitors would respect that, the area desrves its true name, if you love the landscape and the environment the least you can do is start by giving it its correct name once it has been pointed out what it is.
> Or is your poll fashioned to ensnare pedants, anal retentives and general arse-wipes?
I guess that covers me, so why do I do it and get all the abuse, because I care about heritage, and I care about the beautiful areas we climb and walk in , and I care about them getting the respect they deserve and a starting point is giving them their correct name.
The Lakes is 'The Lakes' cos thats what it is. The bulk of the High Peak is taken up by the huge plateaus that are Kinder and Bleaklow, two of the last great wilderness areas south of the border, perhaps only equalled by Dartmoor ( never Dartmoors).
Certainly not Peaks and certainly not why the area is called the PEAK district.
The rest of the Peak is mostly moorland and small limestone hills and valleys, peaks have nothing to do with its name. I just wish visitors would respect that, the area desrves its true name, if you love the landscape and the environment the least you can do is start by giving it its correct name once it has been pointed out what it is.
In reply to Al Evans:
Like I said, I tend to give it its full name when I refer to it! Respecting it fully!
I like your passion!
Like I said, I tend to give it its full name when I refer to it! Respecting it fully!
I like your passion!
Another irritation is Birchens. What's the obsession with the random pluralisation of place names?
In reply to Al Evans: You don't ever refer to 'The Gower' by any chance?
In reply to karl walton:
Peaks
Peaks
In reply to karl walton:
Results to date
Peak 6
Peaks 5
Only counting one of Rosie's votes, and ignoring random spelling variations and general rubbish.
Thanks all.
Results to date
Peak 6
Peaks 5
Only counting one of Rosie's votes, and ignoring random spelling variations and general rubbish.
Thanks all.
In reply to karl walton:
reach your zenith? (District)
Living in the PEAK, I have to say I tend to name the crag I'm visiting rather than saying I'm going to the Yorkshire, Derbyshire, Cheshire or even the Lancashire Peak District, as it may confuse. (look at the boundries the Peak District NP covers).
Guide book areas are second best, but this has all changed with Western Grit. Windgather + Castle Naze may be in the Peak District (not sure), but all the Lancashire crags aren't? Most Chew Valley crags are in Lacashire however!
reach your zenith? (District)
Living in the PEAK, I have to say I tend to name the crag I'm visiting rather than saying I'm going to the Yorkshire, Derbyshire, Cheshire or even the Lancashire Peak District, as it may confuse. (look at the boundries the Peak District NP covers).
Guide book areas are second best, but this has all changed with Western Grit. Windgather + Castle Naze may be in the Peak District (not sure), but all the Lancashire crags aren't? Most Chew Valley crags are in Lacashire however!
In reply to Alphin:
I guess we know that the Peak District National Park is not all in one county, but it doesn't seem particularly relevant to whether we it the Peak or the Peaks!
I guess we know that the Peak District National Park is not all in one county, but it doesn't seem particularly relevant to whether we it the Peak or the Peaks!
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:
I'm willing to be corrected, but I thought it was 'Gower', although I have heard 'The Gower Peninsula' used, even in articles by locals.
Anyhow, I'm getting Piqued, and Rosie, you are just being naughty, as usual.
> (In reply to Al Evans) You don't ever refer to 'The Gower' by any chance?
I'm willing to be corrected, but I thought it was 'Gower', although I have heard 'The Gower Peninsula' used, even in articles by locals.
Anyhow, I'm getting Piqued, and Rosie, you are just being naughty, as usual.
In reply to Rosie A: Ok, everybody who wants to go climbing in the Peaks can go there, if you can find such a place. But you are not allowed to climb in the Peak having stated your intention of climbing in the Peaks. The Peak police will be checking the stamp on your permit
"Allo allo allo, what have we here? Sorry this permit only allows you to climb in the Peaks, this is the Peak"
" No sorry can't give you directions, never heard of the Peaks, try Chamonix"
"Allo allo allo, what have we here? Sorry this permit only allows you to climb in the Peaks, this is the Peak"
" No sorry can't give you directions, never heard of the Peaks, try Chamonix"
In reply to Al Evans:
" Stop arguing madam, look here is a map of the Peak, you show me where it says Peaks and we'll let you into that bit"
" Stop arguing madam, look here is a map of the Peak, you show me where it says Peaks and we'll let you into that bit"
In reply to Al Evans: I heard a bor-and-bred Derbyshire lass say Peaks t'other day. Listen to the winds of change... desist in your foolishness!
In reply to Rosie A: Hijack...sorry, Rosie I hear you're coming up for the meet in Oct/Nov...will be great to meet you...hijack over
Peak, by the way.
Peak, by the way.
In reply to Rosie A: Aye but 'Derbyshire born, Derbyshire bred, strong in t'arm, weak in t'head'
Rosie do you suggest we get all the maps and guidebooks changed then on the basis of this idiotic poll?
Rosie do you suggest we get all the maps and guidebooks changed then on the basis of this idiotic poll?
In reply to Al Evans: It is definitively The PEAK. I had a friend in Derbyshire who was a dog-fancier. He'd go to meetings of the Hathersage Rare Dog Breeds Society and all the local dog shows. He'd say 'Today I'm going to take a peek at a peke in The Peak'.
Reminds me, I'm going to visit his grave tomorrow. Who'd have thought such a small dog could rip a man's face off? Knew his trick of putting a dog biscuit on his nose and inviting dogs to 'come and get a treat from daddy' would backfire one day.
Reminds me, I'm going to visit his grave tomorrow. Who'd have thought such a small dog could rip a man's face off? Knew his trick of putting a dog biscuit on his nose and inviting dogs to 'come and get a treat from daddy' would backfire one day.
In reply to Marc C:
LOl
LOl
In reply to karl walton:
Never been, but I reckon its Peaks.
Never been, but I reckon its Peaks.
In reply to Ihaventactuallyleditbut...: ITS BLOODY NOT, never has been never will be, grow up.
In reply to Al Evans: Look, it doesn't matter how many votes Peaks gets, its Peak in real life.
In reply to Al Evans:
Bear with me on this, Al:
There's the White Peak, right?
And the Dark Peak, right?
So, if I visit both the White Peak and the Dark Peak in a single trip, can I be said to have visited *both* peaks?
Bear with me on this, Al:
There's the White Peak, right?
And the Dark Peak, right?
So, if I visit both the White Peak and the Dark Peak in a single trip, can I be said to have visited *both* peaks?
In reply to Al Evans:
Dear Al,
Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,
Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,
Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,
Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,
Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,
Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,
Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,
Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks.
Peaks............
Pat
Oh shit,maybe I'm turning into Norrie ......
PS.Actually .It's definately Peak.
Dear Al,
Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,
Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,
Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,
Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,
Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,
Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,
Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,
Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks,Peaks.
Peaks............
Pat
Oh shit,maybe I'm turning into Norrie ......
PS.Actually .It's definately Peak.
In reply to karl walton: peak, however on a related theme is it black rock or black rocks ; )
In reply to Rob Naylor: Don't forget the South West Peak!
http://www.peakdistrict-nationalpark.info/place/characterAreas.html
http://www.peakdistrict-nationalpark.info/place/characterAreas.html
In reply to Rob Naylor:
No you have visited two areas of the Peak District.
> (In reply to Al Evans)
>
> Bear with me on this, Al:>
> There's the White Peak, right?>
> And the Dark Peak, right?
>
> So, if I visit both the White Peak and the Dark Peak in a single trip, can I be said to have visited *both* peaks?
>
> Bear with me on this, Al:>
> There's the White Peak, right?>
> And the Dark Peak, right?
>
> So, if I visit both the White Peak and the Dark Peak in a single trip, can I be said to have visited *both* peaks?
No you have visited two areas of the Peak District.
In reply to Al Evans: Look, no matter how you try and twist it, and how much you all try to wind me up, Its simple, Its the Peak District, in fact Dark and White Peak reinforce the point, they are both areas of the Peak.
If you visit North Sheffield and South Sheffield in the same day, you have still visited Sheffield, not the Sheffields.
What is it with you guys, why can you not accept a simple geographical fact, the name is Peak.
If you visit North Sheffield and South Sheffield in the same day, you have still visited Sheffield, not the Sheffields.
What is it with you guys, why can you not accept a simple geographical fact, the name is Peak.
In reply to Al Evans: You seem to be the one who gets quite passionate about whether the term 'Peak' or 'Peaks' is used, so maybe you'll have some idea as to the answer to this question, but how conclusive is any of the evidence into the etymology of the regions name? You hear a number of theories about the name batted around, which makes me think that no one is really sure where it comes from, which further leads me to the conclusion that you're all arguing one way or the other based on a personal preference rather than any rigourous grounding.
Of course, if you take any of the arguments that believe the name derives from 'pict' or similar, then ultimately the term you use is a corruption of this, and people beginning to refer to it as the 'Peaks' is just the next step in the evolution of the language. Because that's one of the good things about language - it's flexible and fluid and changes according to how the people use it. You can sit there arguing that it's the 'peak' all you want, but if using the term 'peaks' is widely accepted becomes more about the history of the term rather than the current usage.
Of course, if you take any of the arguments that believe the name derives from 'pict' or similar, then ultimately the term you use is a corruption of this, and people beginning to refer to it as the 'Peaks' is just the next step in the evolution of the language. Because that's one of the good things about language - it's flexible and fluid and changes according to how the people use it. You can sit there arguing that it's the 'peak' all you want, but if using the term 'peaks' is widely accepted becomes more about the history of the term rather than the current usage.
In reply to Liam M: This is the first sensible point I have seen made on this thread, the point is Liam that whatever the etymology, it has nothing to do with peaks, as in mountain peaks. Plus the evolution has been done and finalised and the version that will stand is Peak, it will be a long time before London changes its name again although prior to this it was called Londoninium I believe, in the same way it is unlikely that the Peak will change its name for many centuries, indeed I think it would be tragic if the name changed because a load of ignoramouses (spelling) think the name has something to do with it being a region of peaks. A loss of heritage in fact.
The true origin still may yet be found, I assume from your post that you have some idea why it is called the Peak district, most of the idiots posting on here haven't got a clue but at least we can accord the area the respect its history and legends deserve.
The true origin still may yet be found, I assume from your post that you have some idea why it is called the Peak district, most of the idiots posting on here haven't got a clue but at least we can accord the area the respect its history and legends deserve.
In reply to Liam M:
OK Liam so which do you think Peak or Peaks?
OK Liam so which do you think Peak or Peaks?
In reply to karl walton: I'm really not sure; the argument for it being called the Peak over the Peaks seems reasonable to me (though I usually refer to it by it's full title of the Peak District). Though I'm not sure I'm consistent enough in which shortened form I use, and I'm not sure it is really much beyond an academic excercise to get bogged down in it.
But just so it doesn't look like I'm sitting on the fence, I'll say: Peak.
As an aside, I wonder if my lack of true concern for what it's called derives from a similar lack of concern for what I'm called that I've developed. See the problem with my name is, if you can't pronounce the letter 'l' at the start of a word correctly, as I can't, then trying to tell it to people can be quite difficult. So I got used to be all kinds of arbitrary names.
But just so it doesn't look like I'm sitting on the fence, I'll say: Peak.
As an aside, I wonder if my lack of true concern for what it's called derives from a similar lack of concern for what I'm called that I've developed. See the problem with my name is, if you can't pronounce the letter 'l' at the start of a word correctly, as I can't, then trying to tell it to people can be quite difficult. So I got used to be all kinds of arbitrary names.
In reply to Al Evans:
No, they're two peaks.
> Dark and White Peak reinforce the point, they are both areas of the Peak.
No, they're two peaks.
In reply to Andy Hobson: Twin Peaks.
In reply to Andy Hobson: Neither of them are Peaks, what planet are you on??????
In reply to Al Evans:
The same one as you. At least, I think so.
You have two peaks, a white one and a dark one. The plural of peak is peaks.
The same one as you. At least, I think so.
You have two peaks, a white one and a dark one. The plural of peak is peaks.
In reply to Andy Hobson: No, you have two areas of the single Peak, one is white one is dark, they are both part of the Peak, they are not seperate Peaks, anymore than North and south yorkshire are yorkshires
In reply to Al Evans:
Go tell em Al!
Go tell em Al!
In reply to Al Evans:
Impartially speaking naturally.
Impartially speaking naturally.
In reply to karl walton: Feeling a little peaked ?
In reply to Al Evans:
Leave them to it - if they want to sound like they haven't a clue what they are talking about, then so be it!
Chris
Leave them to it - if they want to sound like they haven't a clue what they are talking about, then so be it!
Chris
In reply to Chris Craggs: OK Chris, the voice of reason as usual, I know, I should ignore the idiots.
In reply to karl walton:
Anyone want to volunteer to count this lot up, I've tried a couple of times and keep losing my place?
Anyone want to volunteer to count this lot up, I've tried a couple of times and keep losing my place?
The Lake District, yet still 'The lakes' ?
The Peak District yet...
The Peak District yet...
In reply to Al Evans:
Al: I know, I was winding you up!
However, the idea that names will necessarily be stable over long periods isn't correct. They can change quite noticeably. Baddeley's "English Lake District" for instance, published in the 1920s, calls "Wasdale" and "Wasdale Head" "Wastdale" and "Wastdale Head" throughout. He also calls what we know of as "Catstyecam" or "Catstye Cam" as "Catchedicam" and "Brotherilkeld" is "Butterilkel" throughout the book.
"Wasdale" itself comes from "Vatnsdalr" : "valley of the water" so "Wastw*ter" could be said to have the meaning "water of water".
So names for places change, and the changes are often as a result of misunderstandings or later "back-formations" of names that later people *think* are the original derivations.
I'm fairly laid back about the evolution of nomenclature: if the history is preserved it makes a fascinating insight into the development of language, so the morphing of "Peak" into "Peaks" doesn't actually upset me nearly as much as it upsets you.
However, I do get pissed off with the modiciation of general language as a result of sloppy teaching: mixing up of "disinterested" and "uninterested"; misuse of "militate" and "mitigate" and the use of "less" when "fewer" is correct are among a lot of sloppy usage that pisses me off. Neologisms like "24/7" I can accept, although to me they look ugly to me.
> (In reply to Rob Naylor)
> [...]
>
> No you have visited two areas of the Peak District.
> [...]
>
> No you have visited two areas of the Peak District.
Al: I know, I was winding you up!
However, the idea that names will necessarily be stable over long periods isn't correct. They can change quite noticeably. Baddeley's "English Lake District" for instance, published in the 1920s, calls "Wasdale" and "Wasdale Head" "Wastdale" and "Wastdale Head" throughout. He also calls what we know of as "Catstyecam" or "Catstye Cam" as "Catchedicam" and "Brotherilkeld" is "Butterilkel" throughout the book.
"Wasdale" itself comes from "Vatnsdalr" : "valley of the water" so "Wastw*ter" could be said to have the meaning "water of water".
So names for places change, and the changes are often as a result of misunderstandings or later "back-formations" of names that later people *think* are the original derivations.
I'm fairly laid back about the evolution of nomenclature: if the history is preserved it makes a fascinating insight into the development of language, so the morphing of "Peak" into "Peaks" doesn't actually upset me nearly as much as it upsets you.
However, I do get pissed off with the modiciation of general language as a result of sloppy teaching: mixing up of "disinterested" and "uninterested"; misuse of "militate" and "mitigate" and the use of "less" when "fewer" is correct are among a lot of sloppy usage that pisses me off. Neologisms like "24/7" I can accept, although to me they look ugly to me.
In reply to Bokonon: Lakes has Lakes, the Peak has no Peaks.
In reply to Al Evans:
Ah, yes, but is the Pecsaetas lived in several distinct districts (eg the limestone area and the gritstone area), you could legitimately form a plural
Ah, yes, but is the Pecsaetas lived in several distinct districts (eg the limestone area and the gritstone area), you could legitimately form a plural
In reply to Al Evans:
Lakes apparently only has 2 lakes, the rest technically are called "Waters".
Seen teh "sport in the peaks" thread yet Al??? lol
> (In reply to Bokonon) Lakes has Lakes, the Peak has no Peaks.
Lakes apparently only has 2 lakes, the rest technically are called "Waters".
Seen teh "sport in the peaks" thread yet Al??? lol
In reply to Rob Naylor: So do you think Snowdon should return to Yr Wyddfa, Maybe it should, when did Snowdon come into use anyhow? And what is the welsh equivalent for Snowdonia. I can see more reason for a change of name like this than I can Peak to Peaks, which is just stupid, as there aren't any.
In reply to Removed User: I thought only one, Bassenthwaite Lake, what is the other? But it has got these huge puddley things that are more like lakes than anything the Peak has that looks like Peaks.
In reply to Al Evans:
Lake Windamere?
Lake Windamere?
In reply to Rob Naylor: No, its still a distinct race, it would be like forming a plural of the different English people living in different places in the country as Englishes.
In reply to Removed User: Sorry, its Windermere (not Windamere)mere cuts out the need for 'Lake', its a later addition by the tourist board.
In reply to Al Evans:
Cheers Al. Honestly wasn't aware of that. Wait till I see the question setter at my local pub quiz! grrrr.
Cheers Al. Honestly wasn't aware of that. Wait till I see the question setter at my local pub quiz! grrrr.
In reply to Caralynr: Eryri, of course it is, forgot :-s
In reply to Al Evans: Didn't the Roaches used to be Roches not too long ago? Does that wind you up as well? Adding an s, adding an a. Is all much of a muchness really. It is good that languages evolve and feel alive.
In reply to Tobias at Home: and for the record, I say the peak cos i think it sounds better
In reply to Al Evans:
Then explain the name 'The Peak District' which to any sensible person would suggest that it was a district which comprised a number of peaks, or alternatively that there was a singular peak which dominated and/or typified this geographical area.
I would say that since the latter is most certainly not true, then the former is the only obvious answer – and thus ‘peaks’ is the most logical informalisation of the title.
The etymology of the phrase may well trend towards the use of the singular ‘peak’, however, people not intimately versed with the specific geo-historic etymological naming conventions of that particular area (i.e. outsiders) would almost certainly follow the linguistic conventions found in wider English, and as discussed earlier, these conventions and logic dictate that the use of the informalisation ‘peaks’ is more sensible than ‘peak’ however incorrect it may be.
Then explain the name 'The Peak District' which to any sensible person would suggest that it was a district which comprised a number of peaks, or alternatively that there was a singular peak which dominated and/or typified this geographical area.
I would say that since the latter is most certainly not true, then the former is the only obvious answer – and thus ‘peaks’ is the most logical informalisation of the title.
The etymology of the phrase may well trend towards the use of the singular ‘peak’, however, people not intimately versed with the specific geo-historic etymological naming conventions of that particular area (i.e. outsiders) would almost certainly follow the linguistic conventions found in wider English, and as discussed earlier, these conventions and logic dictate that the use of the informalisation ‘peaks’ is more sensible than ‘peak’ however incorrect it may be.
In reply to Al Evans:
Ah, but does the Carrot Cake have any nuts?
> (In reply to Bokonon) Lakes has Lakes, the Peak has no Peaks.
Ah, but does the Carrot Cake have any nuts?
In reply to Bokonon:
Indeed, and then, as locals we would correct them, and they could stop sounding like dorks!
Chris
>
> The etymology of the phrase may well trend towards the use of the singular ‘peak’, however, people not intimately versed with the specific geo-historic etymological naming conventions of that particular area (i.e. outsiders) would almost certainly follow the linguistic conventions found in wider English, and as discussed earlier, these conventions and logic dictate that the use of the informalisation ‘peaks’ is more sensible than ‘peak’ however incorrect it may be.
> The etymology of the phrase may well trend towards the use of the singular ‘peak’, however, people not intimately versed with the specific geo-historic etymological naming conventions of that particular area (i.e. outsiders) would almost certainly follow the linguistic conventions found in wider English, and as discussed earlier, these conventions and logic dictate that the use of the informalisation ‘peaks’ is more sensible than ‘peak’ however incorrect it may be.
Indeed, and then, as locals we would correct them, and they could stop sounding like dorks!
Chris
In reply to Chris Craggs:
But who sounds like a dork to whom?
Most people locally know that "Wrotham" is pronounced "Root-em" and "Shipbourne" is "Shibben", but whenever I talk about "Heffle" (Heathfield) I get blank looks even from people who live there. The only reason I can think of is that the percentage of in-comers now dominates the town to such an extent that the local pronunciation has started to fall into disuse.
It may happen in the Peak, too!
But who sounds like a dork to whom?
Most people locally know that "Wrotham" is pronounced "Root-em" and "Shipbourne" is "Shibben", but whenever I talk about "Heffle" (Heathfield) I get blank looks even from people who live there. The only reason I can think of is that the percentage of in-comers now dominates the town to such an extent that the local pronunciation has started to fall into disuse.
It may happen in the Peak, too!
In reply to Bokonon: Because its named after an ancient tribe that peopled the area and has nothing to do with either a single peak or many.
In reply to Rob Naylor: There are several places down sarrf that have peculiar pronunciation compared to how they are spelt.
Lewes....... Lewis (is that right?)
and theres somewhere begins with B thats pronunciation is off the planet, it'll come back to me.
Lewes....... Lewis (is that right?)
and theres somewhere begins with B thats pronunciation is off the planet, it'll come back to me.
In reply to Chris Craggs:
I was going to go on and suggest that perhaps a form of linguistic racism, particularly as the rationale lacks any etymological provenance or logic, but thought that it could wait for another day.
> (In reply to Bokonon)
> [...]
>
>
> Indeed, and then, as locals we would correct them, and they could stop sounding like dorks!
>
> Chris
>
>
> [...]
>
>
> Indeed, and then, as locals we would correct them, and they could stop sounding like dorks!
>
> Chris
>
>
I was going to go on and suggest that perhaps a form of linguistic racism, particularly as the rationale lacks any etymological provenance or logic, but thought that it could wait for another day.
In reply to karl walton:
peak peaks both good with me!
peak peaks both good with me!
In reply to Al Evans:
Hence the obvious confusion, and even more reason to cite linguistic racsim in the short tempered nature of 'insiders' replies.
Hence the obvious confusion, and even more reason to cite linguistic racsim in the short tempered nature of 'insiders' replies.
In reply to Bokonon: Not so mate, I have explained this so many times, I accept new people may have missed it but I really think its origin is irrelevant, the real point is that it is The Peak District, how it got the name is really irrelevant other than that people think they are entitled to misuse it because they have an incorrect perception of why it was named that. Point is, Peak is correct, Peaks isn't.
In reply to karl walton: Macpeakles
In reply to Al Evans:
>the Peak has no Peaks.
Well, I think that Chrome, Parkhouse and Hitter Hill could be classed as peaks, and maybe Win Hill as well.
Perhaps the "Peaks" brigade are not as ill-infomed as you imagine, but simply boulderers out for a day's fun on the small patches of exposed limestone of the reef knolls.
I'd be interested to know how many of the Peaksers actually come from the area. Not many I'd guess.
>the Peak has no Peaks.
Well, I think that Chrome, Parkhouse and Hitter Hill could be classed as peaks, and maybe Win Hill as well.
Perhaps the "Peaks" brigade are not as ill-infomed as you imagine, but simply boulderers out for a day's fun on the small patches of exposed limestone of the reef knolls.
I'd be interested to know how many of the Peaksers actually come from the area. Not many I'd guess.
In reply to karl walton: Definitely the peaks. Most defiitely the peaks
In reply to karl walton:
There is one Peak district.
There are two distinct climbing areas within the district, the Dark Peak and the White Peak, so I suppose the pedants could claim that climbers could refer to the Peaks, if they were proposing to visit both!
There is one Peak district.
There are two distinct climbing areas within the district, the Dark Peak and the White Peak, so I suppose the pedants could claim that climbers could refer to the Peaks, if they were proposing to visit both!
In reply to Alan Stark: Its ok Alan, its impossible to be trolled when you are completely right, and those against you are completely wrong.
In reply to Alan Stark:
No its a genuine question.
Looks evenly split too.
> (In reply to karl walton)
>
> You sure you got the spelling right - P (oll) not TR (oll)
>
>
> You sure you got the spelling right - P (oll) not TR (oll)
>
No its a genuine question.
Looks evenly split too.
In reply to karl walton: Peak
In reply to karl walton: Thats because its stupid, its like a poll that says is Black White.
In reply to Al Evans:
You're serious, aren't you?!
Peaks. Terribly sorry. That's what we called it when I was a nipper. Definitely won't change now, looks like there's too much harmless fun to be had winding people up
> people think they are entitled to misuse it
You're serious, aren't you?!
Peaks. Terribly sorry. That's what we called it when I was a nipper. Definitely won't change now, looks like there's too much harmless fun to be had winding people up
In reply to Al Evans:
I appreciate you finding time to add to my threads however stupid or nonsensical they may be.
I appreciate you finding time to add to my threads however stupid or nonsensical they may be.
In reply to karl walton: Its no problem, its essential to educate the stupid as far as we can within their limitations.
In reply to Al Evans:
Have you considered missionary work?
Have you considered missionary work?
In reply to karl walton:
From what I've heard, he quite likes the missionary position, but I dont think he'd consider it as a profession.
> (In reply to Al Evans)
> Have you considered missionary work?
> Have you considered missionary work?
From what I've heard, he quite likes the missionary position, but I dont think he'd consider it as a profession.
In reply to Alan Stark:
Ba bum tshhh...
Ba bum tshhh...
In reply to karl walton:
> (In reply to Al Evans)
> Have you considered missionary work?
I have the T shirt, it says Peak District on it.
> Have you considered missionary work?
In reply to baluchi: Peaks. Obviously.
In reply to lummox: Smmmmiiiilllles Silly people, I am no longer windeable up on this thread, its just too stupid, however I shall continue to point out the truth to all people who do not see the light, be they Christian, Jew, Muslim or atheist, etc.
In reply to Al Evans:
I have the T shirt too, it says Nike on it.
I have the T shirt too, it says Nike on it.
In reply to Rob Naylor:
Interesting how such trivialities excite people. Less meaning fewer has the following OED entry:
A smaller number of; fewer. This originates from the OE. construction of loes adv. (quasi-n.) with a partitive genitive. Freq. found but generally regarded as incorrect.
Then there are loads of citations from 888 to 1972.
It can’t be often that the ‘wrong’ use of less/fewer or Peak/Peaks leads to confusion. What must happen on hearing such earth-shattering solecisms is a click in someone’s brain followed by a hot glow of superiority and condescension, and in some cases a rush of missionary zeal.
> the use of "less" when "fewer" is correct are among a lot of sloppy usage that pisses me off.
Interesting how such trivialities excite people. Less meaning fewer has the following OED entry:
A smaller number of; fewer. This originates from the OE. construction of loes adv. (quasi-n.) with a partitive genitive. Freq. found but generally regarded as incorrect.
Then there are loads of citations from 888 to 1972.
It can’t be often that the ‘wrong’ use of less/fewer or Peak/Peaks leads to confusion. What must happen on hearing such earth-shattering solecisms is a click in someone’s brain followed by a hot glow of superiority and condescension, and in some cases a rush of missionary zeal.
In reply to karl walton:
I say Peak District or Peaks. 'Wrong', I know...
I say Peak District or Peaks. 'Wrong', I know...
In reply to Al Evans:
I disagree entirely, establishing the etymological provenance of a word can be paramount in ascertaining its correct or incorrect pronunciation (and indeed usage), if the alternative scenarios I outlined above were correct, the suggestion that ‘peaks’ is incorrect terminology would have been entirely absurd.
However, taking into account the correct, obtuse, etymology the use of the terminology ‘peak’ would appear to be correct – however, the use of the ‘incorrect’ ‘peaks’ is entirely understandable due to the obtuse nature of etymology – and my criticism of you for the short tempered nature of your responses to people who are merely both following precedent and applying logic still stands.
In addition, language is constantly used and abused by the people that speak it, there are *no* absolutes and all languages evolve over time, the wide spread of usage of the informalisation ‘peaks’ would, in the eyes of lexicographers, be enough to demonstrate ‘common’ usage and therefore eligible to be entered on to the hallowed pages of a dictionary and therefore enter the realms of ‘officially sanctioned’ language – which is as close to ‘correct’ as you can get.
I disagree entirely, establishing the etymological provenance of a word can be paramount in ascertaining its correct or incorrect pronunciation (and indeed usage), if the alternative scenarios I outlined above were correct, the suggestion that ‘peaks’ is incorrect terminology would have been entirely absurd.
However, taking into account the correct, obtuse, etymology the use of the terminology ‘peak’ would appear to be correct – however, the use of the ‘incorrect’ ‘peaks’ is entirely understandable due to the obtuse nature of etymology – and my criticism of you for the short tempered nature of your responses to people who are merely both following precedent and applying logic still stands.
In addition, language is constantly used and abused by the people that speak it, there are *no* absolutes and all languages evolve over time, the wide spread of usage of the informalisation ‘peaks’ would, in the eyes of lexicographers, be enough to demonstrate ‘common’ usage and therefore eligible to be entered on to the hallowed pages of a dictionary and therefore enter the realms of ‘officially sanctioned’ language – which is as close to ‘correct’ as you can get.
In reply to Bokonon: I'm not short tempered. Just because I point it out shortly is that it happens so (too) often I couldnt possibly go into the reasons why its wrong every single time, so I suffice to say, look at the map, look at the guides, thats what its called, use it.
I have posted the origin of the name on here several times over the years, anybody can only go so far.
PS I used to be a train spotter.
I have posted the origin of the name on here several times over the years, anybody can only go so far.
PS I used to be a train spotter.
In reply to Bokonon: I take your point, but Peaks will just be so tragically wrong if it becomes tha accepted usage, almost everybody then will be so stupid to think it is something to do with actual peaks that the real evolution of the etymology will get lost.
In reply to Al Evans:
It's already lost:
Origin uncertain; perh. related to Norwegian regional pjuke pouch-shaped bump, Swedish regional pjuk, pjukk summit, hillock, haycock, prob. < the same Germanic base as POCK n. In later use freq. apprehended as the same word as PEAK n.2, a projecting point(cf. sense 7a s.v.).
Old English peac is attested only as a place-name element (but see note below), chiefly with reference to the Peak District in Derbyshire and Staffordshire; the original sense of the word is assumed to have been ‘knoll, hill, summit’. Although it is sometimes suggested that the name was originally applied to Castle Hill, Castleton, Derbyshire, there is no real evidence for this. Old English Pecsaete, lit. ‘settlers of the Peak’ (one isolated attestation in a document whose original dates from the 7th cent.) shows that even in early use the name had come to be applied to the whole district:
OE Tribal Hidage in W. de G. Birch Cartularium Saxonicum (1885) I. 414 Pecsætna [land] twelf hund hyda.
The same place-name element is app. also attested in other names elsewhere in England, as Pech (1086; now Peek, Devon), Pechesdone (1086; now Pegsdon, Bedfordshire), Pecfortuna (1096-1101; now Peckforton, Cheshire), Pekesbru (late 12th cent.; now Ganton Peak, East Riding, Yorkshire).
The name Peak's Arse (see sense 3), applied to the Peak Cavern, has suggested an alternative etymology of Old English Peac as the name of a demon (cf. the later name Devil's Arse), relating the word to Old English p{umac}ca goblin (see PUCK n.1), but the place-name evidence cited above (in all of which the word appears to be associated with hills) tells against this. From the 17th cent. the name has naturally been associated with PEAK n.2, but the history of the latter makes any etymological connection impossible.
In sense 2 app. so called from the famous Peak Cavern; cf. quot. 1600 s.v PEAKISH a.2
The name is also attested in documents from the early 12th cent. to the late 14th cent. in the Latinized form Peccus, cf.:
a1135 in W. Dugdale Monasticon Anglicanum (1817) I. 1272 Ea die qua Willelmo Peverell dominium meum de Pecco dedi. a1200 in K. Cameron Place-names Derbyshire (1959) I. 1 Altus Peccus. 1223 in K. Cameron Place-names Derbyshire (1959) I. 159 Foresta de Pecco [v.r. Pecko].
For possible evidence of Old English peac in general sense ‘knoll, hill, summit’ cf. the following late copy of a charter of 940 in which the unknown word weac is perh. a scribal error for peac (resulting from the common confusion of the letters w (wynn) and p):
lOE Bounds (Sawyer 463) in W. de G. Birch Cartularium Saxonicum (1887) II. 485 {Th}onam east to lytlan weac su{th}æweardan {th}æt {th}onan east ofær Meone to mæarh {th}orne {th}onan east to mearc hangran su{th}æ weardan utt {th}urh weac to trind lea.
A. Mawer (Probl. Place-name Study (1929) 71) has identified the locality referred to as probably Peake Farms on a prominent spur overlooking the Meon valley in Hampshire.]
> the real evolution of the etymology will get lost.
It's already lost:
Origin uncertain; perh. related to Norwegian regional pjuke pouch-shaped bump, Swedish regional pjuk, pjukk summit, hillock, haycock, prob. < the same Germanic base as POCK n. In later use freq. apprehended as the same word as PEAK n.2, a projecting point(cf. sense 7a s.v.).
Old English peac is attested only as a place-name element (but see note below), chiefly with reference to the Peak District in Derbyshire and Staffordshire; the original sense of the word is assumed to have been ‘knoll, hill, summit’. Although it is sometimes suggested that the name was originally applied to Castle Hill, Castleton, Derbyshire, there is no real evidence for this. Old English Pecsaete, lit. ‘settlers of the Peak’ (one isolated attestation in a document whose original dates from the 7th cent.) shows that even in early use the name had come to be applied to the whole district:
OE Tribal Hidage in W. de G. Birch Cartularium Saxonicum (1885) I. 414 Pecsætna [land] twelf hund hyda.
The same place-name element is app. also attested in other names elsewhere in England, as Pech (1086; now Peek, Devon), Pechesdone (1086; now Pegsdon, Bedfordshire), Pecfortuna (1096-1101; now Peckforton, Cheshire), Pekesbru (late 12th cent.; now Ganton Peak, East Riding, Yorkshire).
The name Peak's Arse (see sense 3), applied to the Peak Cavern, has suggested an alternative etymology of Old English Peac as the name of a demon (cf. the later name Devil's Arse), relating the word to Old English p{umac}ca goblin (see PUCK n.1), but the place-name evidence cited above (in all of which the word appears to be associated with hills) tells against this. From the 17th cent. the name has naturally been associated with PEAK n.2, but the history of the latter makes any etymological connection impossible.
In sense 2 app. so called from the famous Peak Cavern; cf. quot. 1600 s.v PEAKISH a.2
The name is also attested in documents from the early 12th cent. to the late 14th cent. in the Latinized form Peccus, cf.:
a1135 in W. Dugdale Monasticon Anglicanum (1817) I. 1272 Ea die qua Willelmo Peverell dominium meum de Pecco dedi. a1200 in K. Cameron Place-names Derbyshire (1959) I. 1 Altus Peccus. 1223 in K. Cameron Place-names Derbyshire (1959) I. 159 Foresta de Pecco [v.r. Pecko].
For possible evidence of Old English peac in general sense ‘knoll, hill, summit’ cf. the following late copy of a charter of 940 in which the unknown word weac is perh. a scribal error for peac (resulting from the common confusion of the letters w (wynn) and p):
lOE Bounds (Sawyer 463) in W. de G. Birch Cartularium Saxonicum (1887) II. 485 {Th}onam east to lytlan weac su{th}æweardan {th}æt {th}onan east ofær Meone to mæarh {th}orne {th}onan east to mearc hangran su{th}æ weardan utt {th}urh weac to trind lea.
A. Mawer (Probl. Place-name Study (1929) 71) has identified the locality referred to as probably Peake Farms on a prominent spur overlooking the Meon valley in Hampshire.]
In reply to Witkacy: Whewww! Thats what I call research, but does it mean that all the dickheads should stick with Peak at the present time to stop everyone being confused?
In reply to Al Evans:
You're doing a fine job there al.
> does it mean that all the dickheads should stick with Peak
You're doing a fine job there al.
In reply to ultra montane: As in my question to yesbutnobutyes, As far as I know I have never met you, why do you take every opportunity to attack me personally? Am I a threat, why? I dont recall ever having ago at you, or indeed anyone, why am I fair game for personal attacks?
In reply to Al Evans:
Al, read into it what you like, but YOU are the one who just called a whole bunch of people you may never have met "dickheads", and have in the past referred glibly to an aquaintance as a "whore", and bandy around the term "poofter".
people respond to your postings on here, if you take them personally, stop posting rubbish.
Al, read into it what you like, but YOU are the one who just called a whole bunch of people you may never have met "dickheads", and have in the past referred glibly to an aquaintance as a "whore", and bandy around the term "poofter".
people respond to your postings on here, if you take them personally, stop posting rubbish.
In reply to ultra montane: I think posting generic terms is quite different to attacking somebody personally. The first can stimulate discussion, the latter is just nasty.
Also if it was rubbish why does it get over a thousand views?
Also if it was rubbish why does it get over a thousand views?
In reply to Al Evans: Also, as you have been asked before, why do you need to hide behind the cloak of anonimity, I wear my heart on my sleeve, you are just a coward.
In reply to Al Evans:
Your opinion. The people you refer to may take great offense though, can you take that onboard?
How many millions watch Big Brother?
Your threads are like watching a car wreck. Oddly compulsive, but ultimately horrifying.
I'm off to do some work now, sayonara.
> (In reply to ultra montane) I think posting generic terms is quite different to attacking somebody personally.
Your opinion. The people you refer to may take great offense though, can you take that onboard?
> Also if it was rubbish why does it get over a thousand views?
How many millions watch Big Brother?
Your threads are like watching a car wreck. Oddly compulsive, but ultimately horrifying.
I'm off to do some work now, sayonara.
In reply to Al Evans:
The name "Al Evans" means as much to me as "Smithy", "CJD", "BrianT" etc, you're ALL anonymous unless I meet you. It's a frikkin' chatroom.
As I said, I'm off to do some work now.
The name "Al Evans" means as much to me as "Smithy", "CJD", "BrianT" etc, you're ALL anonymous unless I meet you. It's a frikkin' chatroom.
As I said, I'm off to do some work now.
In reply to Al Evans:
Al
even though I know it is Peak, I have over 30 years experience of people (in South Derbyshire and North west Leicestershire) calling it the Peaks so I say Peak District instead.
Al
even though I know it is Peak, I have over 30 years experience of people (in South Derbyshire and North west Leicestershire) calling it the Peaks so I say Peak District instead.
In reply to ultra montane:
I know Al, a kinder and more genreous man you couldnt wish to meet, you are the kind of person that ruins the spirit and intention of chat rooms,particularly this one, what ax do you have to grind? And yes I hide behind a non de plume for personal reasons, but Al doesn't, and I post details of my self, what is the point of your totally non informative details, you may as well not have registered.
This is NOT a 'frikkin chat room' its a forum of people that all have something in common, climbing, many of whom have met each other or know joint friends.
Just piss off and stay with your work unless you want to go with the spirit and intention of this forum.
BPM
I know Al, a kinder and more genreous man you couldnt wish to meet, you are the kind of person that ruins the spirit and intention of chat rooms,particularly this one, what ax do you have to grind? And yes I hide behind a non de plume for personal reasons, but Al doesn't, and I post details of my self, what is the point of your totally non informative details, you may as well not have registered.
This is NOT a 'frikkin chat room' its a forum of people that all have something in common, climbing, many of whom have met each other or know joint friends.
Just piss off and stay with your work unless you want to go with the spirit and intention of this forum.
BPM
In reply to bagpussmadam: Thank you BPS, see you after I get back from UK.
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Elsewhere on the site
Loading Notifications...