Thread
Index
Balance vs. Set in Lines
David MacDuff
Oct. 22, 2000, 11:38 p.m. (Message 23193)
It has slipped into common usage in some dance groups to refer to set in lines (i. e. in a longwise set, men join hands facing ladies, who join hands and set with the pas de basque or common scottishe) as balance, especially in the context of balance, cross over, balance, cross back. This isn't really correct is it? Balance should be reserved for when dancers face in opposite directions as in: 1st couple turn with the right hand, cast off one place (2nd couple move up), 1st couple turn with the left hand to finish joining right hands with 1st corners to balance. Or is it now OK to use the term balance for setting in line where it would be obvious that dancers are not facing in alternate opposite directions? David Kilgore Aldridge
David, I have never liked the term "balance" except when used as a part of the setting step, "balance & pas-de-basque". My reason for this is the confusion caused between the "Highland" and other dance usage as opposed to setting. Historically, "balancing" has been used for a generic setting step. Obviously a free style setting step where the Society uses the term balancing would be inappropriate where a uniformity of a foursome is required. You will find that the Society answers your query in WYJTD. ----- [1982:63-4] ----- "BALANCE IN LINE" "... reel time only ... pas-de-basque, right and left ...." "Setting in line must not be confused with balancing in line." "In setting in line the dancers all face the same way ...." ----------------------- If a teachers has four in a line facing alternatively & holding hands to set, the term "balance" is not only redundant but confusing to those who know what a balance is when setting. In American and EFDSS contra dancing, balance refers to a coupe' as it does for the SOBHD. So I feel it safe to say that the concept of a pdb in this figures is an RSCDS "improvement" in a traditional folk dance form. Therefore to your first question as to whether "balance" should be restricted to couples facing alternate directions in a line, I would say, "yes", and recommend that you simply avoid the word as redundant and devisive in its ambiguity. Goss xxxxxxx.x.xxxx@xxx.xxx
David Kilgore Aldridge wrote: > > It has slipped into common usage in some dance groups > to refer to set in lines (i. e. in a longwise set, men > join hands facing ladies, who join hands and set with > the pas de basque or common scottishe) as balance, > especially in the context of balance, cross over, > balance, cross back. > > Or is it now OK to use the term balance for setting in > line where it would be obvious that dancers are not > facing in alternate opposite directions? I've never used the term "balance" in lieu of "setting in lines", and I can't recall hearing it used that way by any other SCD teachers. Perhaps the teacher you've heard use it is familiar with contra dancing where the term would be used as in "balance and swing your partner" (or corner). Marjorie McLaughlin San Diego, CA
Sylvia Miskoe, wrote: > Perhaps I have an old book and the Society has updated its > language. As Coletta already stated, the official RSCDS meaning of "Balance in Line" is unambiguous. The Manual, page 6.7 (section 6 presents Formations) reads: Balance in Line in Reel and Jig Time. This formation is danced by three or four dancers in line facing alternate ways. It can be danced in the sidelines, across or diagonally. [description follows; Pas de Basque R + L, nearer hands joined] The Formation Index (1996 edition) lists 14 dances with this figure. No "Balance in Line" is defined for Strathspey time. Taken literally, the wording of the manual replies NO to Mike Briggs' question on whether two dancers can "balance in line". One could extend the notion from 4 and 3 dancers to 2, but (with Richard Goss' remark in mind) why not simply say "set" ? No step called "Balance" is defined in the Manual, but, as Richard points out, "Balance" has a very different meaning in the Highland step "Balance & Pas de Basque". Enjoy. Eric Eric T. Ferguson, van Dormaalstraat 15, 5624 KH EINDHOVEN, Netherlands tel: +31-40-243 2878 fax: +31-40-246 7036 e-mail: x.xxxxxxxx@xxxxxxx.xx
If you look in the directions for Scottish Reform, Book 3, you will see that they specifically say 'balance in line'. Perhaps I have an old book and the Society has updated its language but I have always felt that it was permissible to use that phrase in as much as it was written some many years ago. Cheers, Sylvia Miskoe, Concord, NH USA
Just to add to the confusion... the attached link demonstrates the ballet world's definition of "balance" - http://www.abt.org/dictionary/terms/balance.html You will find it looks remarkably like our pas-de-basque. Why "we" (the RSCDS) decided it should only refer to dancers facing in alternate directions, I couldn't say, although as Sylvia and others have pointed out, other folk dance traditions use it similarly when one is facing someone else with hands joined. It may not have originally required dancers to have hands joined, and it may have referred originally only to the step, but with common usage in dances being what it was, the definition became narrowed. A guess only. "Balance-in-line" becomes a convenient way to describe dancers performing this step with hands joined while facing in alternating directions. "Set" on the other hand, could really refer to any "setting step", where in SCD the most common one would be pdb, and certainly our standard for 2 bars of setting is the pdb. I don't know how balance came to refer to the particular movement in Highland often referred to by others (including the RSCDS) as a coupe. Although obviously, there are possibly other ways of referring to setting, etc. For example, I had never before heard of "balancing" as another term for "setting". Richard Goss obviously has a huge amount of experience in this, both from his own dancing and his research, so I don't like to contradict. Merely offering up another point of view, and perhaps hoping to be educated a bit further. regards, Norah
Sylvia Miskoe, wrote; If you look in the directions for Scottish Reform, Book 3, you will see that they specifically say 'balance in line'.... and she's right. In SCD "Balance in line" is a FIGURE not a step. Setting is a step, Balance in Highland dancing is a step. The confusion seems to be coming about by folks abrieviating the name of the figure. Balance in line is dancers setting, in a specific configuration; facing opposite directions, hands linked. cheers, Coletta
Does the term apply to just two dancers (could be partners) setting
facing each other with right hands joined? If not, why not?
Mike
--
---------------------------------------------
Norma Briggs Voice: 608 835 0914
Michael J. Briggs Fax: 608 835 0924
BRIGGS LAW OFFICE
1519 Storytown Rd Oregon WI 53575-2521 USA
---------------------------------------------
HTTP://BRIGGSLAW.HOMESTEAD.COM
---------------------------------------------
My video tape about the "Reel of the 51st Division" includes images of the WWII era dance. The POW segment shows men setting using one setting step; the up-to-date segment shows dancers using today's setting step. If anyone knows what type setting step (reminded more of balancing than setting) was used for the WWII segment perhaps you wouldn't mind explaining how it is done. I thought it looked rather neat - and it accommodated heavy shoes. "Richard L Walker"<xxxxxxxx@xxxxxx.xxx> Pensacola, FL 32504-7726 USA
Brief history of balance as in square/contra dancing: In square an contra dancing when you 'balance' you are doing what in SCD and ECD is called 'setting'. You can balance your partner, another person, or do the step while in a line (usually of 4 and usually facing different directions) or while holding hands in a circle of 4. You can do it on the spot or make the movement a slight forward and back or, especially in a line of 4, side to side. Since you're not on your toes, you can make lots of noise while you do it (if you wish). 19th century dance notes speak of wonderful dancers who could execute many different styles of balance. Cheers, Sylvia Miskoe, Concord, NH USA
>It has slipped into common usage in some dance groups >to refer to set in lines (i. e. in a longwise set, men >join hands facing ladies, who join hands and set with >the pas de basque or common scottishe) as balance, >especially in the context of balance, cross over, >balance, cross back. > >This isn't really correct is it? Balance should be >reserved for when dancers face in opposite directions >as in: > >1st couple turn with the right hand, cast off one >place (2nd couple move up), 1st couple turn with the >left hand to finish joining right hands with 1st >corners to balance. > >Or is it now OK to use the term balance for setting in >line where it would be obvious that dancers are not >facing in alternate opposite directions? No Angus -- * * * * * * * * * * * * * Angus & Puka Henry:- 4 Eagle Court, WULAGI, NT 0812, AUSTRALIA PHONE: (International) + 61 (0)8 8927 9203 FAX: as phone, but phone FIRST to arrange for it to be switched on! Website: <http://www.octa4.net.au/ahenry/>
>It has slipped into common usage in some dance groups >to refer to set in lines (i. e. in a longwise set, men >join hands facing ladies, who join hands and set with >the pas de basque or common scottishe) as balance, >especially in the context of balance, cross over, >balance, cross back. > >This isn't really correct is it? Balance should be >reserved for when dancers face in opposite directions >as in: ... I agree with the many other respondents that in SCD terminology "balance" is not a correct substitute for the verb "set" and that "balance in line" to describe a formation of dancers is the only usage "balance" that I am familiar with in the SCD genre. HOWEVER, it does describe actions in couple dances, including Scottish couple dances (not country dances) that are muted versions of the PdB setting step (i.e. leave off the jete and don't spring off of the floor...just "balance"). Perhaps the terminology you have heard carried over from couple dances in a Ceilidh dance setting. Ceilidh dances are usually simple and taught on the spot. SCD styling is usually not an ingredient in Ceilidh dancing, so in that context "balance" would correctly produce what the caller (teacher) wanted the dancers to do. I used the term "balance" for a muted setting step when I don't want the dancers to do a full-up PdB step (before they are warmed-up for example). In the Round Dancing (couple dancing) genre, one may hear an instruction like "balance away and together" to describe and action where the dancers (usually holding nearer hands) set turning away from each other and then set again turning toward each other (the step is a generic PdB, not and SCD PdB). I am not an authority on Ceilidh (e.g. old-thyme) couple dances but I imagine the term "balance" could be correctly used there as well to describe a muted setting step. Cheers, Oberdan. 184 Estaban Drive, Camarillo, CA 93010-1611 USA Voice: (805) 389-0063, FAX: (805) 484-2775, email: xxxxx@xxxxx.xxx
Oberdan Otto <xxxxx@xxxxx.xxx> writes:
> I am not an authority on Ceilidh (e.g. old-thyme) couple dances but I
> imagine the term "balance" could be correctly used there as well to
> describe a muted setting step.
I don't have the book to hand right now, but I seem to remember that we
do find `balance' to describe a step rather than a formation in the
RSCDS instructions for the Waltz Country Dance.
And I know at least one pas-de-valse country dance (Robert McOwen's Lang
frae Glasgow) where the explanations say `For setting, use a waltz-time
balance right and left'.
So it seems that `balance' (w/o `in line') is all right in country
dancing as long as you're talking about waltz-time things.
Anselm
--
Anselm Lingnau ......................... xxxxxxx@xx.xxxxxxxxxx.xxx-xxxxxxxxx.xx
[E]very science must go through a pre-scientific phase of identifying phenomena
before getting serious. Unfortunately software engineers are making so much
money that the odds of their art turning into a science are very slim.
-- Bill Gribble
BALANCE: Its recap time. So lets see what we have so far. 1. In US contras, balance means a generic setting step. 2. The EFDSS uses balance as a setting step usually involving a step swing, this is also used in Scotland in Ceilidh and County style dancing, and was probably generally before the RSCDS 3. The RSCDS calls setting while holding hands in facing in opposite directions, balancing, otherwise calls it setting in line. 4. In ballet, balence is a low impact form of our pas-de-basque 5. Milligan describes a balance figure in 1951 WYJTD (non- official RSCDS later official after quiet revisions). At about the same time, some dances that used to say balance just say set. 6. Wild Geese, provenance unknown, has the balance figure without the words. 7. Anselm seems to remember the term balance used in the teaching of Waltz Country Dance [aka Dutch Foursome]. Here the ballet pas de valse, looks a lot like balence. 8. I [Goss] was taught the same part of Waltz Country Dance as a 3/4 time or waltzing pas-de-bas(?que?). To be done as per the [incorrectly written] instructions for "Yellow Haired Laddie". 9. Now according to David, we have modern SCD's with the term balance being currently being used. While Anselm says that because it is used in WCD it is OK to use in in setting w/o the alternate facing in a line. ----- This discussion's path justifies my initial thesis that while recognizing an ambiguity, we should quietly retire the term "balance" be cause of the ambiguity. Of course there will be those who will want to change the rest of the world to fit what they think they learned. To quote the late, Hugh Foss's title, "We Agree to Differ" will not help in this case. As the continued use of this term will continue to be devisive and confusing. So I propose the following: 1. Let the country dance world outside the RSCDS have the word "balance" as its use without us is generically consistant. 2. Let the SOBHD, have their setting step called "balance and pas-de-bas" even though they really mean "coupe' and pas-de- bas". At the least the balance part that we use in Highland setting steps is consistant with the rest of the country dance world. 3. Since, A. the RSCDS, has already substituted "set" for "balance" in some of its dances (usually with English sources) where we have inserted pas-de-basque where the English balance used to be and by such act has admitted we have a problem, B. the RSCDS, has avoided the word in some of its recent publications when the previous conditions would have suggested otherwise, C. there is no necessity of this word being included in current vocabulary of the RSCDS, I therefore propose, in the interest of peace and harmony among peoples and nations, that like minded teachers ... A. refrain from using the word "balance" except in the aformentioned SOBHD setting step, and ... B. take every opportunity to encourage the powers that be within the RSCDS, to reconcile their publications in such a way that this verbal ambiguity die a natural death. Goss xxxxxxx.x.xxxx@xxx.xxx
Richard Goss writes:
"Its recap time. So lets see what we have so far. ..." etc.
An interesting and helpful summary from him.
The EFDSS usage of the word "balance" is, as far as I am concerned, always
used to denote a "step - swing" step, (such as is found in La Russe Quadrille
and Bonny Breast Knot), and very often associated with an immediately
following "swing" (Ballroom hold and pivot step).
I have always thought this shewed mid to late C19th origins, probably
descent from the "Balance" (with an acute accent on the 'e' - can't do that
on e-mail!) used in Ballroom Quadrilles.
Nicolas B., Lanark,
Scotland.
> B. the RSCDS, has avoided the word in some of its recent > publications when the previous conditions would have > suggested otherwise, No - in Book 33 - The Music Makars, and Book 38 - Follow Me Home, the RSCDS uses "balance in line" to describe setting in lines with alternate people facing in the opposite direction. These are two that came to mind immediately, there are probably others. Johnnie's Welcome Hame, Book 32? - yes it's used in the description of The Spoke. > C. there is no necessity of this word being included in > current vocabulary of the RSCDS, The necessity is to describe the above quite common formation in a succinct fashion, understandable to the majority of Scottish country dancers. I see no reason to suggest discontinuing its use because a few (surely very few?) use it incorrectly. In fact, its use is expanding, with the introduction of the Strathspey "balance in line", with Highland Schottische steps as in Monadh Liath (actually Drewry calls this "Highland Schottische Balance") and both Highland and Common Schottische in Dogsbody in Milton Levy's Tin Woodman collection. I don't have the original instructions for this to check what his description of the formations was. Becky Becky Sager Marietta GA USA
Richard Goss wrote: > > BALANCE: > > Its recap time. So lets see what we have so far. > > B. take every opportunity to encourage the powers that be > within the RSCDS, to reconcile their publications in > such a way that this verbal ambiguity die a natural > death. > So, on the balance, a fairly complete summary with the recommendation that we put balance out (in the sense of putting out the cat) rather than to be out of balance with the world. ...Keith (balancing delicately and nonlinearly) -- +------------------------------+-------------------------------------------+ I Keith Eric Grant I Hail to the mountains with summits of I I <xxx@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx> I blue. To the glens with their meadows of I I http://www.ramblemuse.com/ I sunshine and dew. To the women and men I I------------------------------I ever constant and true. Ever ready to I I Over the hills, but not I welcome one home. I I too far away from the I From the Scottish-American traditional I I San Francisco East Bay I song "Mist Covered Mountains". I +------------------------------+-------------------------------------------+
I have a teaching philosophy involving instructions that are different for different people moving at the same time. This is because when you are explaing A, B stops listening and doesn't always start when you have shifted to him, especially if A's instructions are long and complicated. Solution: creat meaningful language based on already known terms to be inclusive. We already know that "first corners" are m1w3 w1m2 So instead of saying 1m w 3s and 1w w 2s, I suggest 1st corner couples meaning your 1st corners & their partners The next step is what do you do when 1s & 1st corners join hands and set This is simple, extrapolating from the above I have used 1st diagonal as in join hands in your first diagonal & set given the term "first corners" -> "first corner couple" & -> "first diagonal" extends one known term to another logical one without adding any more concept load as all are built on the concept of corners. When I it comes to which hand, I find that by not indicating, the average beginner discovers this himself. By teaching handing outwith the concept of a dance, most of these problems are easily solved. Since we usually begin a handing activity with the right hand, and give right hand to first corner, then you have only one hand left to give to your partner in your first diagonal. The major problem I have experienced with neologisms, unless they come from the top, is that they are more threatening to those who have already solved the mystery of the initial problem and are too mentally lazy to put themselves in the position of a newcomer who easily gets overwhelmed with words, when too many words concerning how to dance are inserted into how to do this dance. Goss xxxxxxx.x.xxxx@xxx.xxx
Rebecca, I think you have been missing the point in part of this discussion. In examples already given, the Society has already (inconsistantly) been replacing "balance" with "set" when they have re-issued their books. They have already printed new dances with what used to be call "balance" with the word "set". All I have been saying, is that this idea of the Society is a good one which would be better if they consistantly followed it through. The entire concept of a balance in strathspey is impossible because it is impossible to properly perform the setting step and still maintain hands. To cite WYJTD, "balance ... occurs in reel time only". So in the Society's mind a strathspey balance would be impossible. Your own confusion (and the Society's) is implicit in your statement. "Balance in line", in WYJTD is a formation, but everywhere, including nonRSCDS Scottish dancing in Scotland, balancing is a non-pas-de-basque setting step. The confusion was caused by the Society's continued lack of consistancy. "Balance in line" 1st appears in "Scottish Reform" Book 3.1 (1926, cont. at least until 1950 edition) 3&4 7&8 Balance meaning set (2 pas-de-basques) Somewhere between the 1950 edition and the 1964 edition the Society decided to change balance for set (probably because: A. the RSCDS does not balance here, and B. everyone else does balance here and the Society wants them to stop (Reel 51st, esp.) So in Book 3.1 (1964->) 3&4/7&8 now say set. (because that is what we are doing here) Unfortunately WYJTD still uses "Scottish Reform" (which now contains no mention of a balance), as an example of a balance in line. To my knowledge, John Drewry never had any official status with the Society until after Miss Milligan's death. So maybe no one told him about the change when it was made. The late Milt Levy was my student, who, comming from international folk dancing and the EFDSS, never did get along well with RSCDS terms. To have a reasonable discussion, it is not sufficient to find exceptions (I have already said that the Society has been inconsistant in this), what you must do is answer/explain the facts presented by the person with whom you are disagreeing. I am not fortunate enough to have met and polled the majority of dancers (which sounds like, "Mon, all the kids are ...." in which case an intelligent mother will say, "Tell me their names and I'll call their mothers."). I would be willing to consider your comments as relevant when you can respond to, or explain mine. ------ Goss xxxxxxx.x.xxxx@xxx.xxx
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ----__JNP_000_4974.22a7.1c7f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I am not a historian. I have been dancing not quite 20 years. In my dancing lifetime, "balance in line" has been consistently used by my teachers, locally and teachers of international fame, to mean this one simple thing, setting in lines with alternate people facing in opposite directions. If this is a neologism, it is one that comes from the top. Has Mr. Goss not noticed that WYJTD was replaced years ago by the RSCDS Manual? Page 6.7 describes Balance in Line very clearly. The dances I cited are not "exceptions" but are examples of current, ie: the past 20 years, RSCDS terminology. I only have Scottish Reform in the "Revised Edition 1961" Pocket Book, but that uses "balance in line" in bars 3-4 and 7-8. My Book 13 is the "Revised Edition 1980" Pocket Book, and in Reel of the 51st, there's "balance in line" again. My Pocket Book 24 is undated, but I believe it had to have been published between those two dates, and the term doesn't appear in Wild Geese. That the RSCDS may have used different terms at different times is not surprising, there are many examples of that. I am not concerned that balance may mean something else in other dance disciplines, nor that it may have meant something different in the past. Language and dance are both in continuous flux. At this point, the RSCDS still does not "officially" recognize the possibility of the Strathspey balance in line, but these dances exist and are being danced and enjoyed. This recognition will come in due time. Yes, changing hands in a lovely continuous movement is part of this formation, but the essential character of alternate dancers facing in opposite directions is maintained. A lot of Mr. Goss' stuff leaves me very confused, but I am quite clear on the two points I chose to answer. Obviously I can't prove that the majority of dancers understand the term "balance in line", despite the Society's recently consistent use of it, but that's the way I understand it. My mother's phone number is 01352-740-441 ( but don't all call her, she's 89) Becky Becky Sager Marietta GA USA ----__JNP_000_4974.22a7.1c7f Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Dwindows-1252" http-equiv=3DContent-= Type> <META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2314.1000" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD> <BODY bottomMargin=3D0 leftMargin=3D3 rightMargin=3D3 topMargin=3D0> <DIV></DIV> <DIV>I am not a historian. I have been dancing not quite 20 years. In my = dancing=20 lifetime, "balance in line" has been consistently used by my teachers, = locally=20 and teachers of international fame, to mean this one simple thing, setting = in=20 lines with alternate people facing in opposite directions. If this is a=20 neologism, it<STRONG><U> is </U></STRONG>one<STRONG> </STRONG>that comes = from=20 the top. Has Mr. Goss not noticed that WYJTD was replaced years ago by the = RSCDS=20 Manual? Page 6.7 describes Balance in Line very clearly.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The dances I cited are not "exceptions" but are examples of current, = ie:=20 the past 20 years, RSCDS terminology. I only have Scottish Reform in the=20 "Revised Edition 1961" Pocket Book, but that uses "balance in line" in bars= 3-4=20 and 7-8. My Book 13 is the "Revised Edition 1980" Pocket Book, and in Reel = of=20 the 51st, there's "balance in line" again. My Pocket Book 24 is undated, = but I=20 believe it had to have been published between those two dates, and the term= =20 doesn't appear in Wild Geese.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>That the RSCDS may have used different terms at different times is not= =20 surprising, there are many examples of that. I am not concerned that = balance may=20 mean something else in other dance disciplines, nor that it may have meant= =20 something different in the past. Language and dance are both in continuous= =20 flux.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>At this point, the RSCDS still does not "officially" recognize the=20 possibility of the Strathspey balance in line, but these dances exist and = are=20 being danced and enjoyed. This recognition will come in due time. Yes, = changing=20 hands in a lovely continuous movement is part of this formation, but the=20 essential character of alternate dancers facing in opposite directions is=20 maintained. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>A lot of Mr. Goss' stuff leaves me very confused, but I am quite clear= on=20 the two points I chose to answer. Obviously I can't prove that the majority= of=20 dancers understand the term "balance in line", despite the Society's = recently=20 consistent use of it, but that's the way I understand it. My mother's phone= =20 number is 01352-740-441 ( but don't all call her, she's 89)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Becky</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Becky Sager </DIV> <DIV>Marietta GA USA</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML> ----__JNP_000_4974.22a7.1c7f--
This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0017_01C03E9B.A4C4FC80 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I must say that I agree with Becky Sager's last two messages. =20 The phrase "balance in line" is certainly very well understood = everywhere, and, if it is then I think it sad to make a such an = unnecessary issue of it. Let it "be" common usage and not confuse everyone with petty details. Simon Scott Vancouver ------=_NextPart_000_0017_01C03E9B.A4C4FC80 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" = http-equiv=3DContent-Type> <META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2314.1000" name=3DGENERATOR> <STYLE></STYLE> </HEAD> <BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff bottomMargin=3D0 leftMargin=3D3 rightMargin=3D3 = topMargin=3D0> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I must say that I agree with Becky Sager's last two messages. = </DIV> <DIV>The phrase "balance in line" is certainly very well understood = everywhere,=20 and, if it is then I think it sad to make a such an unnecessary = issue of=20 it.</DIV> <DIV>Let it "be" common usage and not confuse everyone with petty = details.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Simon Scott</DIV> <DIV>Vancouver</DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE=20 style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: = 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px"> <DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML> ------=_NextPart_000_0017_01C03E9B.A4C4FC80--
In a message dated 10/25/2000 7:46:02 AM Eastern Standard Time,=20 xxxxxxxxx@xxx.xxx writes: > I have always thought this shewed mid to late C19th origins, probably=20 > descent from the "Balance" (with an acute accent on the 'e' - can't do=20 that=20 > on e-mail!) used in Ballroom Quadrilles. > Nicolas B.,=20 Lanark,=20 > Scotland. If you want to make a French "=E9", try "Alt130". It works with my software=20 (word). But I must admit I don't know if it survives e-mail transmission. Chris.=20
An aside:
If you install the "English (United States)" keyboard language with the
"United States - International" layout, you can make most symbols (=D1, =F1=
, =D3,
=F3, =D6, =F6, etc.) with just two strokes. The first stroke is the char=
acter
appearing above the letter ("~", "'", or '"' in the examples); the second
stroke is the letter itself. If the second stroke is a space, you get th=
e
"~", "'" or the '"' itself. How handy this might be depends on how many
times you normally use the ALT characters vs. how many times you use the =
"
or the ' symbols. I like it since I only have to use an approximation of
the symbol appearing above the letter along with the letter - no lookups.
"Richard L Walker"<xxxxxxxx@xxxxxx.xxx>
Pensacola, FL 32504-7726 USA