privateer Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 That should say "simply does not", not "does not simply". I know what it should be grammatically, it's a meme. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted October 5, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted October 5, 2012 No no no no no no no no. You do not put jam on cheese. Savages. I haven't. I'm just wondering what, IF I did Raspberry or strawberry. Not sure why it's frowned upon. People have cheese with chutney, or fruit. Not really much different. Anyway, it's **** lovely. Try it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted October 5, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted October 5, 2012 That should say "simply does not", not "does not simply". I know what it should be grammatically, it's a meme. I know it's a meme, but I'm a pedant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted October 5, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted October 5, 2012 Brie with grapes. Very. Good. Indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted October 5, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted October 5, 2012 Exactly. Or that wensleydale with cranberries in. Lovely stuff. Not that far removed from having it with a bit of jam. (how the **** do you spell wensleydale? is that right?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
privateer Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 That should say "simply does not", not "does not simply". I know what it should be grammatically, it's a meme. I know it's a meme, but I'm a pedant. So am I which is why I contemplated writing it correctly but my pedantry overruled the idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted October 5, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted October 5, 2012 Exactly. Or that wensleydale with cranberries in. Lovely stuff. Can't agree. Cheese should never have anything "in" it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shillzz Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 Exactly. Or that wensleydale with cranberries in. Lovely stuff. Can't agree. Cheese should never have anything "in" it. Not even Maggots? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 What about mould? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 Anyway, quince jam is a pretty classic combination for cheese and apricot jam works pretty well also. The sour fruits work better than sweet jams like strawberry or raspberry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted October 5, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted October 5, 2012 What about mould?I make an exception for blue cheeses, as the mould develops as it matures. It's processing cheese to add stuff later - fruit, chives, etc. - that I dislike. Just eat those things with the cheese if you want that option. Pasteurising is a no-no, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted October 5, 2012 Moderator Share Posted October 5, 2012 No I must say I do like chilli cheddars and cranberry wensleydale. It doesn't matter at what point the cheese meets the other stuff. As I always say - "It all ends up the same colour in the end". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brumerican Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 The Mexicano cheddar they do in asda is amazing . Full of jalapenos and spices . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leviramsey Posted October 6, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted October 6, 2012 That should say "simply does not", not "does not simply". Not necessarily. "One does not simply..." makes sense if the adverb simply is modifying the verb phrase, i.e. the statement being made is that it is not as easy as it may at first glance seem to do whatever action is referred to in the verb phrase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leviramsey Posted October 6, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted October 6, 2012 Same here. I always envisaged them making sandwiches with these: Jelly and jam are different in American English (per Food and Drug Administration regulations, see 21 Code of Federal Regulations 150). Jelly refers to a cooked and pectin-gelled fruit product made from the juice of the fruit (and other liquids) and thus does not contain pieces of fruit, seeds, etc. Jam refers to a similar product which may (and generally does; jam generally carries a higher-quality connotation than jelly) contain seeds, pulp, or other pieces of fruit. Canadian definitions are more or less similar: jams are "the product made by boiling fruit, fruit pulp, or canned fruit to a suitable consistency with water and a sweetening ingredient" while jelly is "the product made by boiling fruit juice or concentrated fruit juice that is free from seeds and pulp with water and a sweetening ingredient until it acquires a gelatinous consistency" (UK definition jelly may or may not qualify as jelly in Canada, come to think of it). Smucker's Strawberry Jelly ingredients: Strawberry juice, high fructose corn syrup, corn syrup, fruit pectin, citric acid Smucker's Strawberry Jam ingredients: Seedless strawberries, high fructose corn syrup, corn syrup, sugar, fruit pectin, citric acid Smucker's Strawberry Preserves ingredients: Strawberries, high fructose corn syrup, corn syrup, sugar, fruit pectin, citric acid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leviramsey Posted October 6, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted October 6, 2012 Played my first game of Axis & Allies in years for about eight hours earlier tonight. Was all going well to start (if one follows the one round equals 2-3 months of wartime conversion, then right until about 1947 or so) for the Axis (me), partly due, to be fair, to some very cautious play by the Allies (the USA made no real effort to go past Midway until about 1948, which helped Japan take Australia, New Zealand, China, India, and Siberia). Then successive assaults on Moscow (after about the sixth battle of Stalingrad) by the Germans and Japanese failed and I was toast. Had we been playing with the [controversial] Axis economic victory condition, I would have won. (that board and set is the classic Milton Bradley GameMaster Series edition... since then the successor to this edition in the franchise is Axis & Allies 1942 (there are other editions which start at another time) and I'll probably get the second edition of 1942 that recently rolled out) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ingram85 Posted October 6, 2012 Share Posted October 6, 2012 Katie McGrath aka Morgana from the BBC drama 'Merlin' I want to hang out the back of that quite badly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted October 6, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted October 6, 2012 Not necessarily. "One does not simply..." makes sense if the adverb simply is modifying the verb phrase, i.e. the statement being made is that it is not as easy as it may at first glance seem to do whatever action is referred to in the verb phrase. Sure. I never said it was ungrammatical. But it doesn't convey the meaning I believe was intended. "One does not simply [do something]" = One needs to do something more, or take into account some special circumstances before doing it. "One simply does not [do something]" = One does not do it under any circumstances. It would be a faux pas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Posted October 6, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted October 6, 2012 Haven't been here for ages, but thought I'd come and have a look at the new site. Is nice. Simon done good. And that's cheered me up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leviramsey Posted October 7, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted October 7, 2012 Sure. I never said it was ungrammatical. But it doesn't convey the meaning I believe was intended. "One does not simply [do something]" = One needs to do something more, or take into account some special circumstances before doing it. "One simply does not [do something]" = One does not do it under any circumstances. It would be a faux pas. I've always given it the former interpretation and it hasn't led me detectably astray. (though for someone with comparatively little motivation/will/what-have-you, such as myself, the two are basically the same thing...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts