Madhu <enometh@meer.net> wrote:

> * Paul Wolff <rrxuD0VZ6VxlFAAn @wolff.co.uk> :
> Wrote on Thu, 8 Feb 2024 23:07:05 +0000:
> >><https://www.flickr.com/photos/62449798@N03/53515698038/in/dateposted-public
/>
> > That says "You must select YES or NO for each category before
> > submitting choices". So I told it to bugger off.
> not a great pic but just to note -- flickr can now work without j-s. the
> direct link is available (on viewing the page
> https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53515698038_dd2388cae2_w.jpg)
[refs ending in ) really should be enclosed in < > to be clickable]

You've been whooshed.
The book doesn't exist, except as a photoshopped image on Flickr,

Jan

On Friday, February 9, 2024 at 1:29:36 AM UTC-7, Hibou wrote:
> Le 09/02/2024 à 07:59, Athel Cornish-Bowden a écrit :
> >
> > Galoshlessness is foolishness, when sharply slants the sleet.
> All good things come to those who Google - and so the Web yields...
>
> I'm having a rapprochement with galoshes
> And some would say this heralds middle age;
> Yes, sneering they would say
> 'Does he always wear pince-nez?
> Old jossers wore galoshes when ladies' hats were cloches,
> Ha! Woollen combinations are this dodderer's next stage!'
....

So you're telling me that in British English, "rapprochement" and "cloche
[hat]" have the same vowel as "galoshes", and "rapprochement" is
accented on the second syllable? I'd have thought they'd have the
vowel of "reproach", "approach", "poach", "coach", and "brooch", all
borrowed from French words with -oche. I guess it depends on when
they were borrowed.

--
Jerry Friedman

On 08 Feb 2024, Rich Ulrich wrote

> On Thu, 08 Feb 2024 10:24:03 GMT, HVS <office@REMOVETHISwhhvs.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>> On 08 Feb 2024, Tony Cooper wrote
>>
>>> On Wed, 07 Feb 2024 20:39:13 -0500, Rich Ulrich
>>> <rich.ulrich@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 07 Feb 2024 16:28:22 GMT, HVS
>>>> <office@REMOVETHISwhhvs.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 07 Feb 2024, Tony Cooper wrote
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, 7 Feb 2024 09:23:20 +0100, Bertel Lund Hansen
>>>>>> <gadekryds@lundhansen.dk> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Peter Moylan wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As a child I wore galoshes -- rubber things that go over your
>>>>>>>> shoes -- in winter. I see that they can still be bought, but
>>>>>>>> I haven't seen any for years.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I havn't used those, but my grandfather did. It didn't appeal
>>>>>>> to me. We had wellies - supplied by the way by the same
>>>>>>> grandfather who was a shoemaker.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> PS. Is "wellies" specifically British or do non-British
>>>>>>> understand it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> PPS. Someone once asked in the Danish language group why the
>>>>>>> papers had constructed a new word instead of "American". He
>>>>>>> referred to Usain Bolt.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I wore galoshes in the winter when I was growing up in
>>>>>> Indianapolis.
>>>>>
>>>>> Same for me, growing up in Ottawa; also wore toe rubbers.
>>>>>
>>>>> I can't recall seeing either for some years before I left Canada
>>>>> in 1982. I think I'd switched to snow boots (the ones that you
>>>>> don't wear shoes with) when I moved to Edmonton in 1976.
>>>>
>>>> I remember wearing galoshes, 1950s, Texas, and seeing the
>>>> rubbers that slip over shoes - I'm not familiar with the term
>>>> 'toe rubbers' but it sounds appropriate.
>>>
>>> The first rubber shoecovers, that I remember, were "Totes". They
>>> slipped on over one's shoes.
>>
>> Are those the ones that are flexible enough to fold up? The ones I
>> remember were made of fairly rigid rubber; not made for folding.
>>
>> I posted this in reply to Rich Ulrich:
>>
>> https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/233204242445
>
>
> Thanks - Those are exactly what I recall. I notice that the
> item is called 'toe overshoe galoshes'. I wonder if people
> really included them in what they call galoshes or if that word
> is included to facilitate hits on computer searches.
>
> Google ngrams can usefully present 'toe rubbers' where
> 'rubbers' is much broader. I see early peaks in 1934 and 1944,
> though the whole chart has 6 and 7 zeroes as lead-in to the
> percentage: low usage, which bottoms out at 0% counted
> for a couple of years in my early adulthood, the 1970s. There
> is a rise from 1975 for 25 years, then a fallback.

I associate the term "toe rubbers" with my early growing-up years, and
would have learnt the wordm from my father. He was born in rural
Manitoba in 1917, later moving in to Winnipeg -- dates which fit nicely
with those peaks in 1934 and 1944.

Toe rubbers were a particular kind of shoe rubber, and in my English
were different from galoshes, overshoes, and some other footwear.

Galoshes/Rubber boots: thin, flexible rubber boots to cover your shoes
and ankles; closed with a zipper. Also used for rainy weather as well
as snow or slush, to protect your shoes.

Overshoes: flexible rubber boots which covered the whole shoe but not
your ankles.

Toe rubbers: hard and fairly inflexible rubbers which covered the toe,
sole, and back of the shoe, but didn't cover the laces.

Snow boots: similar to galoshes, but worn with heavy socks rather than
shoes.

Flying boots: Like galoshes, but much heavier -- wooly fleece-lined
leather boots covering your shoes and ankles. (I think they were worn
over your shoes rather than with socks. but could be wrong on that.)
They were worn mainly for warmth rather than to protect your shoes --
my dad had a pair of these when he worked in the arctic in the 1950s,
flying in small planes with little or no heating.)

--
Cheers, Harvey

On Friday, February 9, 2024 at 9:07:51 AM UTC-7, HVS wrote:
....

> Galoshes/Rubber boots: thin, flexible rubber boots to cover your shoes
> and ankles; closed with a zipper. Also used for rainy weather as well
> as snow or slush, to protect your shoes.

Our "boots", which some people called galoshes, closed with a series of
buckles. (Suburban Cleveland, Ohio.)

> Overshoes: flexible rubber boots which covered the whole shoe but not
> your ankles.
....

Those were our "rubbers". I wouldn't call them boots. As Tony said,
jokes were made.

> Flying boots: Like galoshes, but much heavier -- wooly fleece-lined
> leather boots covering your shoes and ankles. (I think they were worn
> over your shoes rather than with socks. but could be wrong on that.)
> They were worn mainly for warmth rather than to protect your shoes --
> my dad had a pair of these when he worked in the arctic in the 1950s,
> flying in small planes with little or no heating.)

Ouch.

What was he doing in the Arctic?

--
Jerry Friedman

On 09 Feb 2024, Jerry Friedman wrote

> On Friday, February 9, 2024 at 9:07:51 AM UTC-7, HVS wrote:
> ...
>
>> Galoshes/Rubber boots: thin, flexible rubber boots to cover your
>> shoes and ankles; closed with a zipper. Also used for rainy
>> weather as well as snow or slush, to protect your shoes.
>
> Our "boots", which some people called galoshes, closed with a
> series of buckles. (Suburban Cleveland, Ohio.)
>
>> Overshoes: flexible rubber boots which covered the whole shoe but
>> not your ankles.
> ...
>
> Those were our "rubbers". I wouldn't call them boots. As Tony
> said, jokes were made.
>
>> Flying boots: Like galoshes, but much heavier -- wooly
>> fleece-lined leather boots covering your shoes and ankles. (I
>> think they were worn over your shoes rather than with socks. but
>> could be wrong on that.) They were worn mainly for warmth rather
>> than to protect your shoes -- my dad had a pair of these when he
>> worked in the arctic in the 1950s, flying in small planes with
>> little or no heating.)
>
> Ouch.
>
> What was he doing in the Arctic?

From 1956 to the early 1960s he was with the Canadian department of
Indian and Northern Affairs, doing one-month to six-week trips flying
into northern communities to teach native children.

The programme is undoubtedly seen these days as a cringingly
patronising and imperialistic imposition of white culture on native
communities, but at the time it was well-intentioned.

When he took the job in 1956 he'd been teaching at the Peguis Reserve
north of Winnipeg (although not native, he was born in that part of
Manitoba). My mother once told me that they thought they were going
to be based in the north, and it was only later that they discovered
the job was based in Ottawa, with extended flying trips to the
scattered communities.

On 09-Feb-24 10:00, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> Madhu <enometh@meer.net> wrote:
>
>> * Paul Wolff <rrxuD0VZ6VxlFAAn @wolff.co.uk> :
>> Wrote on Thu, 8 Feb 2024 23:07:05 +0000:
>>>> <https://www.flickr.com/photos/62449798@N03/53515698038/in/dateposted-public
> />
>>> That says "You must select YES or NO for each category before
>>> submitting choices". So I told it to bugger off.
>> not a great pic but just to note -- flickr can now work without j-s. the
>> direct link is available (on viewing the page
>> https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53515698038_dd2388cae2_w.jpg)
> [refs ending in ) really should be enclosed in < > to be clickable]
>
> You've been whooshed.
> The book doesn't exist, except as a photoshopped image on Flickr,

That complaint was about how Flickr behaved.

--
Sam Plusnet

On 09-Feb-24 15:53, Jerry Friedman wrote:
> On Friday, February 9, 2024 at 1:29:36 AM UTC-7, Hibou wrote:
>> Le 09/02/2024 à 07:59, Athel Cornish-Bowden a écrit :
>>>
>>> Galoshlessness is foolishness, when sharply slants the sleet.
>> All good things come to those who Google - and so the Web yields...
>>
>> I'm having a rapprochement with galoshes
>> And some would say this heralds middle age;
>> Yes, sneering they would say
>> 'Does he always wear pince-nez?
>> Old jossers wore galoshes when ladies' hats were cloches,
>> Ha! Woollen combinations are this dodderer's next stage!'
> ...
>
> So you're telling me that in British English, "rapprochement" and "cloche
> [hat]" have the same vowel as "galoshes", and "rapprochement" is
> accented on the second syllable? I'd have thought they'd have the
> vowel of "reproach", "approach", "poach", "coach", and "brooch", all
> borrowed from French words with -oche. I guess it depends on when
> they were borrowed.
>
Maybe it's free verse.
(Have you been asked to pay anything for it?)

--
Sam Plusnet

On Friday, February 9, 2024 at 12:14:11 PM UTC-7, Sam Plusnet wrote:
> On 09-Feb-24 15:53, Jerry Friedman wrote:
> > On Friday, February 9, 2024 at 1:29:36 AM UTC-7, Hibou wrote:
> >> Le 09/02/2024 à 07:59, Athel Cornish-Bowden a écrit :
> >>>
> >>> Galoshlessness is foolishness, when sharply slants the sleet.
> >> All good things come to those who Google - and so the Web yields...
> >>
> >> I'm having a rapprochement with galoshes
> >> And some would say this heralds middle age;
> >> Yes, sneering they would say
> >> 'Does he always wear pince-nez?
> >> Old jossers wore galoshes when ladies' hats were cloches,
> >> Ha! Woollen combinations are this dodderer's next stage!'
> > ...
> >
> > So you're telling me that in British English, "rapprochement" and "cloche
> > [hat]" have the same vowel as "galoshes", and "rapprochement" is
> > accented on the second syllable? I'd have thought they'd have the
> > vowel of "reproach", "approach", "poach", "coach", and "brooch", all
> > borrowed from French words with -oche. I guess it depends on when
> > they were borrowed.
> >
> Maybe it's free verse.
> (Have you been asked to pay anything for it?)

I would pay, if I could find the meter.

--
Jerry Friedman

Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:

> On 09-Feb-24 10:00, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > Madhu <enometh@meer.net> wrote:
> >
> >> * Paul Wolff <rrxuD0VZ6VxlFAAn @wolff.co.uk> :
> >> Wrote on Thu, 8 Feb 2024 23:07:05 +0000:
> >>>> <https://www.flickr.com/photos/62449798@N03/53515698038/in/dateposted-pub
lic
> > />
> >>> That says "You must select YES or NO for each category before
> >>> submitting choices". So I told it to bugger off.
> >> not a great pic but just to note -- flickr can now work without j-s. the
> >> direct link is available (on viewing the page
> >> https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53515698038_dd2388cae2_w.jpg)
> > [refs ending in ) really should be enclosed in < > to be clickable]
> >
> > You've been whooshed.
> > The book doesn't exist, except as a photoshopped image on Flickr,
>
> That complaint was about how Flickr behaved.

Yes, but the remark had to be attached somewhere,

Jan

Jerry Friedman <jerry.friedman99@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Friday, February 9, 2024 at 12:14:11?PM UTC-7, Sam Plusnet wrote:
> > On 09-Feb-24 15:53, Jerry Friedman wrote:
> > > On Friday, February 9, 2024 at 1:29:36?AM UTC-7, Hibou wrote:
> > >> Le 09/02/2024 à 07:59, Athel Cornish-Bowden a écrit :
> > >>>
> > >>> Galoshlessness is foolishness, when sharply slants the sleet.
> > >> All good things come to those who Google - and so the Web yields...
> > >>
> > >> I'm having a rapprochement with galoshes
> > >> And some would say this heralds middle age;
> > >> Yes, sneering they would say
> > >> 'Does he always wear pince-nez?
> > >> Old jossers wore galoshes when ladies' hats were cloches,
> > >> Ha! Woollen combinations are this dodderer's next stage!'
> > > ...
> > >
> > > So you're telling me that in British English, "rapprochement" and "cloche
> > > [hat]" have the same vowel as "galoshes", and "rapprochement" is
> > > accented on the second syllable? I'd have thought they'd have the
> > > vowel of "reproach", "approach", "poach", "coach", and "brooch", all
> > > borrowed from French words with -oche. I guess it depends on when
> > > they were borrowed.
> > >
> > Maybe it's free verse.
> > (Have you been asked to pay anything for it?)
>
> I would pay, if I could find the meter.

Lovely Rita isn't available anymore,

Jan

On 2024-02-09 15:15, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> Jerry Friedman <jerry.friedman99@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Friday, February 9, 2024 at 12:14:11?PM UTC-7, Sam Plusnet wrote:
>>> On 09-Feb-24 15:53, Jerry Friedman wrote:
>>>> On Friday, February 9, 2024 at 1:29:36?AM UTC-7, Hibou wrote:
>>>>> Le 09/02/2024 à 07:59, Athel Cornish-Bowden a écrit :
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Galoshlessness is foolishness, when sharply slants the sleet.
>>>>> All good things come to those who Google - and so the Web yields...
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm having a rapprochement with galoshes
>>>>> And some would say this heralds middle age;
>>>>> Yes, sneering they would say
>>>>> 'Does he always wear pince-nez?
>>>>> Old jossers wore galoshes when ladies' hats were cloches,
>>>>> Ha! Woollen combinations are this dodderer's next stage!'
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> So you're telling me that in British English, "rapprochement" and "cloche
>>>> [hat]" have the same vowel as "galoshes", and "rapprochement" is
>>>> accented on the second syllable? I'd have thought they'd have the
>>>> vowel of "reproach", "approach", "poach", "coach", and "brooch", all
>>>> borrowed from French words with -oche. I guess it depends on when
>>>> they were borrowed.
>>>>
>>> Maybe it's free verse.
>>> (Have you been asked to pay anything for it?)
>>
>> I would pay, if I could find the meter.
>
> Lovely Rita isn't available anymore,

Maid my day!

--
He's so posh, his butler was born with a silver spoon in his mouth.

On Fri, 9 Feb 2024 16:06:24 -0600
lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:

> On 2024-02-09 15:15, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > Jerry Friedman <jerry.friedman99@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Friday, February 9, 2024 at 12:14:11?PM UTC-7, Sam Plusnet wrote:
> >>> On 09-Feb-24 15:53, Jerry Friedman wrote:
> >>>> On Friday, February 9, 2024 at 1:29:36?AM UTC-7, Hibou wrote:
> >>>>> Le 09/02/2024 à 07:59, Athel Cornish-Bowden a écrit :
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Galoshlessness is foolishness, when sharply slants the sleet.
> >>>>> All good things come to those who Google - and so the Web yields...
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I'm having a rapprochement with galoshes
> >>>>> And some would say this heralds middle age;
> >>>>> Yes, sneering they would say
> >>>>> 'Does he always wear pince-nez?
> >>>>> Old jossers wore galoshes when ladies' hats were cloches,
> >>>>> Ha! Woollen combinations are this dodderer's next stage!'
> >>>> ...
> >>>>
> >>>> So you're telling me that in British English, "rapprochement" and "cloche
> >>>> [hat]" have the same vowel as "galoshes", and "rapprochement" is
> >>>> accented on the second syllable? I'd have thought they'd have the
> >>>> vowel of "reproach", "approach", "poach", "coach", and "brooch", all
> >>>> borrowed from French words with -oche. I guess it depends on when
> >>>> they were borrowed.
> >>>>
> >>> Maybe it's free verse.
> >>> (Have you been asked to pay anything for it?)
> >>
> >> I would pay, if I could find the meter.
> >
> > Lovely Rita isn't available anymore,
>
> Maid my day!
>
If I could get her away from Robin, I'd marry one.

--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

On 09/02/24 16:52, Snidely wrote:
> On Thursday, Paul Wolff queried:
>> On Wed, 7 Feb 2024, at 08:53:46, Athel Cornish-Bowden posted:
>>> On 2024-02-07 01:00:38 +0000, Peter Moylan said:
>>>> On 07/02/24 08:57, Snidely wrote:
>>>>> I remember when bubble umbrellas were introduced in Portland (Oregon,
>>>>> land of Jupe Pluvius). It was a big thing. That was, I think, in
>>>>> the mid-to-late '70s, and long after colored umbrellas. IIRC, I was
>>>>> shown Barbies with the colored umbrellas in the mid '60s (when GI Joe
>>>>> was still the matching size (12"?)). Most of the girls had vinyl
>>>>> boots that went on over their shoes, but I think us guys wore leather
>>>>> boots.
>>>> As a child I wore galoshes -- rubber things that go over your shoes --
>>>> in winter. I see that they can still be bought, but I haven't seen any
>>>> for years.
>>>
>>> As Paul Jennings put it:
>>>
>>> Galoshlessness is foolishness, when sharply slants the sleet.
>>>
>> I'm already expecting the next line to end with "feet".
>
> Well, we already have the web so why not feet?

Web-footed creatures have no interest in galoshes.

--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW

In article <378b4ef3-bea9-45cc-81a4-
3d208cb57c27n@googlegroups.com>, jerry.friedman99
@gmail.com says...
>
> On Friday, February 9, 2024 at 1:29:36 AM UTC-7, Hibou wrote:
> > Le 09/02/2024 à 07:59, Athel Cornish-Bowden a écrit :
> > >
> > > Galoshlessness is foolishness, when sharply slants the sleet.
> > All good things come to those who Google - and so the Web yields...
> >
> > I'm having a rapprochement with galoshes
> > And some would say this heralds middle age;
> > Yes, sneering they would say
> > 'Does he always wear pince-nez?
> > Old jossers wore galoshes when ladies' hats were cloches,
> > Ha! Woollen combinations are this dodderer's next stage!'
> ...
>
> So you're telling me that in British English, "rapprochement" and "cloche
> [hat]" have the same vowel as "galoshes",
and boche,

and "rapprochement" is
> accented on the second syllable?

Yes.

I'd have thought they'd have the
> vowel of "reproach", "approach", "poach", "coach", and "brooch", all
> borrowed from French words with -oche.

mais non.

I guess it depends on when
> they were borrowed.

Janet

In article <uq7gaq$342d5$1@dont-email.me>,
peter@pmoylan.org.invalid says...
>
> On 09/02/24 16:52, Snidely wrote:
> > On Thursday, Paul Wolff queried:
> >> On Wed, 7 Feb 2024, at 08:53:46, Athel Cornish-Bowden posted:
> >>> On 2024-02-07 01:00:38 +0000, Peter Moylan said:
> >>>> On 07/02/24 08:57, Snidely wrote:
> >>>>> I remember when bubble umbrellas were introduced in Portland (Oregon,
> >>>>> land of Jupe Pluvius). It was a big thing. That was, I think, in
> >>>>> the mid-to-late '70s, and long after colored umbrellas. IIRC, I was
> >>>>> shown Barbies with the colored umbrellas in the mid '60s (when GI Joe
> >>>>> was still the matching size (12"?)). Most of the girls had vinyl
> >>>>> boots that went on over their shoes, but I think us guys wore leather
> >>>>> boots.
> >>>> As a child I wore galoshes -- rubber things that go over your shoes --
> >>>> in winter. I see that they can still be bought, but I haven't seen any
> >>>> for years.
> >>>
> >>> As Paul Jennings put it:
> >>>
> >>> Galoshlessness is foolishness, when sharply slants the sleet.
> >>>
> >> I'm already expecting the next line to end with "feet".
> >
> > Well, we already have the web so why not feet?
>
> Web-footed creatures have no interest in galoshes.

Geese used to have their feet dipped in tar then sand,
for the long walk to market.

Turkeys wore leather or canvas boots.

Janet.

On 2024-02-10 10:58:26 +0000, Janet said:

> In article <378b4ef3-bea9-45cc-81a4-
> 3d208cb57c27n@googlegroups.com>, jerry.friedman99
> @gmail.com says...
>>
>> On Friday, February 9, 2024 at 1:29:36 AM UTC-7, Hibou wrote:
>>> Le 09/02/2024 à 07:59, Athel Cornish-Bowden a écrit :
>>>>
>>>> Galoshlessness is foolishness, when sharply slants the sleet.
>>> All good things come to those who Google - and so the Web yields...
>>>
>>> I'm having a rapprochement with galoshes
>>> And some would say this heralds middle age;
>>> Yes, sneering they would say
>>> 'Does he always wear pince-nez?
>>> Old jossers wore galoshes when ladies' hats were cloches,
>>> Ha! Woollen combinations are this dodderer's next stage!'
>> ...
>>
>> So you're telling me that in British English, "rapprochement" and "cloche
>> [hat]" have the same vowel as "galoshes",
> and boche,
>
> and "rapprochement" is
>> accented on the second syllable?
>
> Yes.
>
> I'd have thought they'd have the
>> vowel of "reproach", "approach", "poach", "coach", and "brooch", all
>> borrowed from French words with -oche.

"Coach" is from Hungarian "Kocs" (a place in Hungary), via French, however.
>
> mais non.
>
> I guess it depends on when
>> they were borrowed.
>
>
>
> Janet

--
Athel -- French and British, living in Marseilles for 36 years; mainly
in England until 1987.

On 10/02/24 22:07, Janet wrote:
> In article <uq7gaq$342d5$1@dont-email.me>, peter@pmoylan.org.invalid
> says...
>>
>> On 09/02/24 16:52, Snidely wrote:
>>> On Thursday, Paul Wolff queried:
>>>> On Wed, 7 Feb 2024, at 08:53:46, Athel Cornish-Bowden posted:

>>>>> Galoshlessness is foolishness, when sharply slants the
>>>>> sleet.
>>>>>
>>>> I'm already expecting the next line to end with "feet".
>>>
>>> Well, we already have the web so why not feet?
>>
>> Web-footed creatures have no interest in galoshes.
>
> Geese used to have their feet dipped in tar then sand, for the long
> walk to market.
>
> Turkeys wore leather or canvas boots.

They don't like the hard paths that humans prefer. They wouldn't have
needed those protections if a sufficiently muddy trail had been available.

--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW

On Fri, 9 Feb 2024, at 08:59:12, Athel Cornish-Bowden posted:
>On 2024-02-09 05:52:24 +0000, Snidely said:
>> On Thursday, Paul Wolff queried:
>>> On Wed, 7 Feb 2024, at 08:53:46, Athel Cornish-Bowden posted:
>>>> On 2024-02-07 01:00:38 +0000, Peter Moylan said:
>>>>> On 07/02/24 08:57, Snidely wrote:
>>>>>> I remember when bubble umbrellas were introduced in Portland (Oregon,
>>>>>> land of Jupe Pluvius). It was a big thing. That was, I think, in
>>>>>> the mid-to-late '70s, and long after colored umbrellas. IIRC, I was
>>>>>> shown Barbies with the colored umbrellas in the mid '60s (when GI Joe
>>>>>> was still the matching size (12"?)). Most of the girls had vinyl
>>>>>> boots that went on over their shoes, but I think us guys wore leather
>>>>>> boots.
>>>>> As a child I wore galoshes -- rubber things that go over your shoes --
>>>>> in winter. I see that they can still be bought, but I haven't seen any
>>>>> for years.
>>>> As Paul Jennings put it:
>>>> Galoshlessness is foolishness, when sharply slants the sleet.
>>>>
>>> I'm already expecting the next line to end with "feet".
>
>If I can fnd The Jenguin Pennings I'll look and see if there is another
>line. I don't think there is.

Oh! Thanks for the hint (as our eastern friends might say). Look no
further: I have mine here, lurking among two volumes of the same
Cautionary Verses, one of Cautionary Tales, the Nonsense of Edward Lear,
Verse and Worse, and Pam Ayres, amongst others.

But looking ahead before copying it all out, I see Hibou cheated, and
went to web. Pouf. And there's still an initial rhyme, "street".

>> Well, we already have the web so why not feet?
>> /dps

Footwise, galoshes is amphibrachic.
--
Paul W