The phrase "Eat to live, Not live to eat"
is an example of antimetabole.

Here's why: -- Antimetabole involves the repetition
of the same words in a reversed order.

Antimetabole:

-- Those who can, do. Those who can't, criticize. (George Bernard Shaw)

-- Silence is golden, speech is silver. (Proverb)

-- We live to learn, and learn to live. (Latin Proverb)

-- "Fair is foul, and foul is fair" (Shakespeare's Macbeth)

Chiasmus:
-- By day the frolic, and the dance by night. (Samuel Johnson)

-- The wicked flee though no one pursues, but the righteous are as bold
as a lion. (Proverbs 28:1)

-- Some are born great, some achieve greatness, and some have greatness
thrust upon them. (Shakespeare's Twelfth Night)

-- "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for
your country" (JFK's Inaugural Address)

HenHanna formulated on Friday :
> Here's why: -- Antimetabole involves the repetition
> of the same words in a reversed order

I read this somewhere, maybe related to someone brain:

On the left there's nothing right, on the right there's nothing left.

--
/-\ /\/\ /\/\ /-\ /\/\ /\/\ /-\ T /-\
-=- -=- -=- -=- -=- -=- -=- -=- - -=-
............ [ al lavoro ] ...........

[Followup-To: declined]

Ammammata <ammammata@tiscali.it> wrote:

> HenHanna formulated on Friday :
> > Here's why: -- Antimetabole involves the repetition
> > of the same words in a reversed order
> >
>
> I read this somewhere, maybe related to someone brain:
>
> On the left there's nothing right, on the right there's nothing left.
>

In the case of motoring here in the UK:
The right side is the wrong side; the left side is the right side.

Furthermore:
Two wrongs don't make a right but three lefts do.

--
^Ï^. Sn!pe, PA, FIBS - Professional Crastinator

My pet rock Gordon just is.

Sn!pe <snipeco.2@gmail.com> wrote at 12:36 this Friday (GMT):
> [Followup-To: declined]
>
> Ammammata <ammammata@tiscali.it> wrote:
>
>> HenHanna formulated on Friday :
>> > Here's why: -- Antimetabole involves the repetition
>> > of the same words in a reversed order
>> >
>>
>> I read this somewhere, maybe related to someone brain:
>>
>> On the left there's nothing right, on the right there's nothing left.
>>
>
> In the case of motoring here in the UK:
> The right side is the wrong side; the left side is the right side.
>
> Furthermore:
> Two wrongs don't make a right but three lefts do.

So an odd number of wrongs is correct?
What about 0 wrongs, then?
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid>
wrote:

> Sn!pe <snipeco.2@gmail.com> wrote at 12:36 this Friday (GMT):
> > [Followup-To: declined]
> >
> > Ammammata <ammammata@tiscali.it> wrote:
> >
> >> HenHanna formulated on Friday :
> >> > Here's why: -- Antimetabole involves the repetition
> >> > of the same words in a reversed order
> >> >
> >>
> >> I read this somewhere, maybe related to someone brain:
> >>
> >> On the left there's nothing right, on the right there's nothing left.
> >>
> >
> > In the case of motoring here in the UK:
> > The right side is the wrong side; the left side is the right side.
> >
> > Furthermore:
> > Two wrongs don't make a right but three lefts do.
> >
>
> So an odd number of wrongs is correct?
> What about 0 wrongs, then?
>

There's nothing wrong with that.

--
^Ï^. Sn!pe, PA, FIBS - Professional Crastinator

My pet rock Gordon just is.

HenHanna wrote:

> The phrase "Eat to live, Not live to eat"
> is an example of antimetabole.

> Here's why: -- Antimetabole involves the repetition
> of the same words in a reversed order.

> Antimetabole:

> -- Those who can, do. Those who can't, criticize. (George Bernard Shaw)

"Those who can't, teach."

LionelEdwards wrote:

> HenHanna wrote:

>> The phrase "Eat to live, Not live to eat"
>> is an example of antimetabole.

>> Here's why: -- Antimetabole involves the repetition
>> of the same words in a reversed order.

>> Antimetabole:

>> -- Those who can, do. Those who can't, criticize. (George Bernard Shaw)

> "Those who can't, teach."

"He who cannot, teaches."

https://books.google.com/books?id=bflyEAAAQBAJ&pg=PT227

--
Jerry Friedman

Sn!pe <snipeco.2@gmail.com> wrote at 13:00 this Friday (GMT):
> candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid>
> wrote:
>
>> Sn!pe <snipeco.2@gmail.com> wrote at 12:36 this Friday (GMT):
>> > [Followup-To: declined]
>> >
>> > Ammammata <ammammata@tiscali.it> wrote:
>> >
>> >> HenHanna formulated on Friday :
>> >> > Here's why: -- Antimetabole involves the repetition
>> >> > of the same words in a reversed order
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> I read this somewhere, maybe related to someone brain:
>> >>
>> >> On the left there's nothing right, on the right there's nothing left.
>> >>
>> >
>> > In the case of motoring here in the UK:
>> > The right side is the wrong side; the left side is the right side.
>> >
>> > Furthermore:
>> > Two wrongs don't make a right but three lefts do.
>> >
>>
>> So an odd number of wrongs is correct?
>> What about 0 wrongs, then?
>>
>
> There's nothing wrong with that.

Ah, right.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid>
wrote:
[...]
> >> >> I read this somewhere, maybe related to someone brain:
> >> >>
> >> >> On the left there's nothing right, on the right there's nothing left.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > In the case of motoring here in the UK:
> >> > The right side is the wrong side; the left side is the right side.
> >> >
> >> > Furthermore:
> >> > Two wrongs don't make a right but three lefts do.
> >> >
> >>
> >> So an odd number of wrongs is correct?
> >> What about 0 wrongs, then?
> >>
> >
> > There's nothing wrong with that.
> >
>
> Ah, right.
>

I saw what you did there, all right?
I've left room below for another right-on comment.

--
^Ï^. Sn!pe, PA, FIBS - Professional Crastinator

My pet rock Gordon just is.

Op 5/04/2024 om 12:10 schreef HenHanna:
>
> The phrase   "Eat to live, Not live to eat"
>                        is an example of antimetabole.
>
> Here's why: -- Antimetabole involves the repetition
>                   of the same words in a reversed  order.
>
>
> Antimetabole:
>
> -- Those who can, do. Those who can't, criticize.  (George Bernard Shaw)
>
> -- Silence is golden, speech is silver.   (Proverb)

Those are not the same form.
I like this one, similar:

Perdre sa vie pour la gagner. (work ethics)

> -- We live to learn, and learn to live.    (Latin Proverb)
>
> -- "Fair is foul, and foul is fair" (Shakespeare's Macbeth)

Des chercheurs, on les trouve. Des trouveurs, on les cherche. (R&D)

--
guido wugi

On 2024-04-05 13:52:39 +0000, LionelEdwards said:

> HenHanna wrote:
>
>
>> The phrase "Eat to live, Not live to eat"
>> is an example of antimetabole.
>
>> Here's why: -- Antimetabole involves the repetition
>> of the same words in a reversed order.
>
>
>> Antimetabole:
>
>> -- Those who can, do. Those who can't, criticize. (George Bernard Shaw)
> "Those who can't, teach."

and those who can't teach, teach others to teach.

That sums up well the education department at Birmingham when I was there.

--
Athel -- French and British, living in Marseilles for 37 years; mainly
in England until 1987.

Sn!pe <snipeco.2@gmail.com> wrote at 01:31 this Saturday (GMT):
> candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid>
> wrote:
> [...]
>> >> >> I read this somewhere, maybe related to someone brain:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On the left there's nothing right, on the right there's nothing left.
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > In the case of motoring here in the UK:
>> >> > The right side is the wrong side; the left side is the right side.
>> >> >
>> >> > Furthermore:
>> >> > Two wrongs don't make a right but three lefts do.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> So an odd number of wrongs is correct?
>> >> What about 0 wrongs, then?
>> >>
>> >
>> > There's nothing wrong with that.
>> >
>>
>> Ah, right.
>>
>
> I saw what you did there, all right?
> I've left room below for another right-on comment.

....That was kinda an accident but thanks.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

On 07/04/24 23:44, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> On 2024-04-05 13:52:39 +0000, LionelEdwards said:
>> HenHanna wrote:

>>> -- Those who can, do. Those who can't, criticize. (George
>>> Bernard Shaw)
>> "Those who can't, teach."
>
> and those who can't teach, teach others to teach.
>
> That sums up well the education department at Birmingham when I was
> there.

Comments I heard in the past from student teachers hinted that this was
part of a "kick them upstairs" strategy by the NSW Education Department.
If someone turned out to be hopeless at teaching, they were transferred
to a Teacher's College.

I now doubt that. Teacher's Colleges no longer exist, partly because of
a power grab by the federal government. (Those colleges were controlled
by the state, but universities are controlled by the federal
government.) But, as far as I could tell, university education departments
continued to employ incompetents.

My information could be out of date, though. Tenured academics continue
to lose their jobs during the periodic economy drives, so tenure no
longer means what it used to mean. By now there must be a new generation
running the education departments, and I don't know what their
reputation is.

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

On Mon, 8 Apr 2024 11:09:05 +1000, Peter Moylan
<peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:

>On 07/04/24 23:44, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
>> On 2024-04-05 13:52:39 +0000, LionelEdwards said:
>>> HenHanna wrote:
>
>>>> -- Those who can, do. Those who can't, criticize. (George
>>>> Bernard Shaw)
>>> "Those who can't, teach."
>>
>> and those who can't teach, teach others to teach.
>>
>> That sums up well the education department at Birmingham when I was
>> there.
>
>Comments I heard in the past from student teachers hinted that this was
>part of a "kick them upstairs" strategy by the NSW Education Department.
>If someone turned out to be hopeless at teaching, they were transferred
>to a Teacher's College.

I never heard anything like that about American colleges.

We used to have Teachers Colleges, once called Normal Schools.
That was back when the educated jobs for women were as nurses
or teachers, like, days of my youth.

My mother got a college education, c. 1940. I remember her
saying that she took one course in education. The main theme
of the course was that "memorization is a poor tool" ... and rote
memorization was how the course was taught.

>
>I now doubt that. Teacher's Colleges no longer exist, partly because of
>a power grab by the federal government. (Those colleges were controlled
>by the state, but universities are controlled by the federal
>government.) But, as far as I could tell, university education departments
>continued to employ incompetents.

In the US, I think that everyone looked for more prestige, and
that meant that Normal Schools become colleges and colleges
became universities. I don't know how the funding factored in.

>
>My information could be out of date, though. Tenured academics continue
>to lose their jobs during the periodic economy drives, so tenure no
>longer means what it used to mean. By now there must be a new generation
>running the education departments, and I don't know what their
>reputation is.

One thing I remember from my college days was that, according
to a nation-wide survey, the college students who had the lowest
mean scores on the SAT or ACT exams were students who ended
up enrolled in agriculture programs and in education. The men who
went into education (1960s, 1970s) were especially those who
would also be coaches for athletic teams. In my small high school, I
had coaches teach me world history and civics. In junior high, a
coach taught general science.

Though I was in a small school, some of my teachers were pretty
good. I think our school district was a bit richer and paid more
than some others, and got some young, bright prospects who
would pick up experience for a few years before moving on.

Like you, I don't know today's reputation. Teachers DO get paid
more than they used to, and (therefore) more men compete for
jobs.

--
Rich Ulrich

On 08/04/24 13:41, Rich Ulrich wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Apr 2024 11:09:05 +1000, Peter Moylan
> <peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:

>> I now doubt that. Teacher's Colleges no longer exist, partly
>> because of a power grab by the federal government. (Those colleges
>> were controlled by the state, but universities are controlled by
>> the federal government.) But, as far as I could tell, university
>> education departments continued to employ incompetents.
>
> In the US, I think that everyone looked for more prestige, and that
> meant that Normal Schools become colleges and colleges became
> universities. I don't know how the funding factored in.

Prestige was also a factor here, of course. In particular, politicians
were seduced by findings that university graduates got better-paying
jobs than non-graduates, so they reckoned that more people would be
prosperous if they got more students into universities. From my
viewpoint the increased intake, and the elimination of many
non-university institutions, led to the dumbing down of some existing
subjects, and the introduction of lots more subjects that I would not
consider to be university-level subjects.

It also led to higher unemployment among graduates, so not so many
people in better-paying jobs.

But the power grab was the real reason for amalgamating tertiary
institutions, although that was never publicly stated. (The stated
reason was increased economic efficiency, even though there were known
studies that showed that the smaller colleges, the ones not top-heavy
with management, were the most cost-efficient.)

There was a rumoured third reason. The then Minister for Education had
apparently had an unhappy time in his own university studies, and many
of us felt that he was out to punish the universities.

> One thing I remember from my college days was that, according to a
> nation-wide survey, the college students who had the lowest mean
> scores on the SAT or ACT exams were students who ended up enrolled in
> agriculture programs and in education. The men who went into
> education (1960s, 1970s) were especially those who would also be
> coaches for athletic teams. In my small high school, I had coaches
> teach me world history and civics. In junior high, a coach taught
> general science.

There was a time in Australia where the teachers were pretty good, on
the whole. Then empire-building by the people running the Teacher's
Colleges led to an over-supply of teachers. As a result, an education
qualification became a route to unemployment. That meant teaching became
unpopular, and education departments had to accept students whose high
school final result (we have state-wide public exams at the end of high
school) was so low that they couldn't get into anything else. At one
point, in Newcastle, the education department had to introduce new
subjects in remedial English and remedial arithmetic.

I hope that has changed by now, but I haven't checked lately.

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

On Mon, 8 Apr 2024 14:46:12 +1000, Peter Moylan
<peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:

>
>There was a time in Australia where the teachers were pretty good, on
>the whole. Then empire-building by the people running the Teacher's
>Colleges led to an over-supply of teachers

I've wondered about American teachers while thinking about
the fact that teaching and nursing were the only employment
for educated women (as I mentioned earlier).

One implication of that, I figure, is that the women who went
into teaching included those not satisfied to be stay-at-home
moms. Every bright woman who wanted to work would consider
teaching. The baby boom generation started sending women
to college who considered careers in other fields, despite the
conventions that tried to keep them out.

And that's partly why teaching degenerated.

--
Rich Ulrich

On 4/7/2024 8:00 AM, candycanearter07 wrote:
> Sn!pe <snipeco.2@gmail.com> wrote at 01:31 this Saturday (GMT):
>> candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid>
>> wrote:
>> [...]
>>>>>>> I read this somewhere, maybe related to someone brain:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On the left there's nothing right, on the right there's nothing left.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In the case of motoring here in the UK:
>>>>>> The right side is the wrong side; the left side is the right side.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Furthermore:
>>>>>> Two wrongs don't make a right but three lefts do.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So an odd number of wrongs is correct?
>>>>> What about 0 wrongs, then?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> There's nothing wrong with that.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Ah, right.
>>>
>>
>> I saw what you did there, all right? I've left room below for another right-on comment.
>
>
> ...That was kinda an accident but thanks.

Always check your pockets twice. You never know what the Left hand stole
from the Right.

_______________________

[No One Left to Lie To: The Triangulations of William Jefferson Clinton]
is a 1999 book about President of the United States Bill Clinton by
author and journalist Christopher Hitchens.

------- Maybe the [Left] in the title was.........

HenHanna <HenHanna@devnull.tb> wrote at 20:13 this Tuesday (GMT):
> On 4/7/2024 8:00 AM, candycanearter07 wrote:
>> Sn!pe <snipeco.2@gmail.com> wrote at 01:31 this Saturday (GMT):
>>> candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid>
>>> wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>>>>>> I read this somewhere, maybe related to someone brain:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On the left there's nothing right, on the right there's nothing left.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In the case of motoring here in the UK:
>>>>>>> The right side is the wrong side; the left side is the right side.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Furthermore:
>>>>>>> Two wrongs don't make a right but three lefts do.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So an odd number of wrongs is correct?
>>>>>> What about 0 wrongs, then?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> There's nothing wrong with that.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ah, right.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I saw what you did there, all right? I've left room below for another right-on comment.
>>
>>
>> ...That was kinda an accident but thanks.
>
>
> Always check your pockets twice. You never know what the Left hand stole
> from the Right.
>
>
> _______________________
>
> [No One Left to Lie To: The Triangulations of William Jefferson Clinton]
> is a 1999 book about President of the United States Bill Clinton by
> author and journalist Christopher Hitchens.
>
>
> ------- Maybe the [Left] in the title was.........

Sorry, I don't get the joke..
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom