Alan,
To denote extra persons in a reel, in place of 'tandem', you could use
'pair".
Thus Luckenbooth Brooch reels would read-
reels/3/across/pair/promenade
if two coupes were in promenade hold in the reel the modifier is dead easy-
reels/3/across/2pair/promenade
In Drewry's Tickle My Fancy the taxonomy would be-
reel/3/center/3pair/tandem
Pelorus Jack then becomes
reel/3/diagonal/half/pair/tandem/lead change
Suggestion repectfully submitted
Peter Price
New Haven, Ct.
On 11/13/06, Alan Paterson <xxxx.xxxxxxxx@xxxxxxx.xx> wrote:
>
> On 12/11/2006 18:39, Alasdair Graham wrote:
> > If you have the time why not 'invent' new meanings for all the other
> > words in our common dictionary and then see where that takes us.
> >
> > If words do not have a universally understood meaning then you might as
> > well scrap speech.
> >
> > Alasdair Graham,
> > Dumbarton, Scotland.
>
> Let's not get silly about this. I appreciate that you are being
> sarcastic (or is it ironic?) but it serves no very useful purpose.
>
> We are DANCING not riding bicycles. It is perfectly valid to move words
> from one context to another, however, to play the word-police and say
> "Hmm. If they overtake one another - which is impossible on a bicycle -
> then it is definitely not tandem" is - I can't think of a better word -
> just being silly.
>
> No-one has yet objected to the expression "Petronella in Tandem"
> although it might be a bit tricky to do on a bike (could make seats
> which swivel, I suppose). Is it perhaps the case that John Drewry is a
> big hero, whereas RSCDS are the bad guys?
>
> Each activity which absorbs a word for its own purposes changes the
> meaning slightly. One of the wonders of language.
>
> There are many vocal participants on this group who deride the RSCDS for
> being pedantic. Pots and kettles?
>
> Alan
>
>
