should

This is the place to post questions and discussions on usage and style. The members of the Wordwizard Clubhouse will also often be able to help you to formulate that difficult letter.

should

Post by Archived Reply » Sun Jan 06, 2002 10:51 pm

Oh I'm sure they were, Erik (2) Not a chance, she's all mine
Reply from dale hileman (Apple Valley, CA - U.S.A.)
Post actions:
Signature: Reply imported and archived

should

Post by Archived Reply » Sun Jan 06, 2002 11:05 pm

Phil, finally I get a response! that is a very serious question and worth considering

Not whether I should have a stake driven through my body but whether a car that gets wider toward the back can be said to taper toward the rear
Reply from dale hileman (Apple Valley, CA - U.S.A.)
Post actions:
Signature: Reply imported and archived

should

Post by Archived Reply » Sun Jan 06, 2002 11:20 pm

dale;
I think I can answer your question, and here it is; NO!

A taper is where some object at one point is more narrow than the other, which may be visualized by drawing a cone.

If your car were constructed like a cone, with the narrow point to the rear, then yes to your question, but, I don't think you are asking that. You are asking; "if the wider point of my car were in the rear, could I say that it is tapered to the rear?" Sorry, but your question doesn't make any sense.
Reply from Dave Schroder (Dayton, Ohio - U.S.A.)
Post actions:
Signature: Reply imported and archived

should

Post by Archived Reply » Sun Jan 06, 2002 11:34 pm

Dave: What started the whole thing is the thread below entitled "Crossfire." In it, I made reference to an ad for the Daimler-Chrysler Roadster which seemed to say that the car tapered toward the rear, with a response by Ken Greenwald which seemed to reinforce that interpretation. All others I have been able to find agree with you, that it appears to taper toward the front
Reply from dale hileman (Apple Valley, CA - U.S.A.)
Post actions:
Signature: Reply imported and archived

should

Post by Archived Reply » Sun Jan 06, 2002 11:49 pm

dale;

It's not crossfire or the roadster that is confusing me about your question.

Here is your statement, word for word. I suggest you read it over a few times, until it rings a sour bell:

"Not whether I should have a stake driven through my body but whether a car that gets wider toward the back can be said to taper toward the rear."

Good luck

Reply from Dave Schroder (Dayton, Ohio - U.S.A.)
Post actions:
Signature: Reply imported and archived

should

Post by Archived Reply » Mon Jan 07, 2002 12:03 am

Thanks Dave but sorry, no bell, you'll have to explain
Reply from dale hileman (Apple Valley, CA - U.S.A.)
Post actions:
Signature: Reply imported and archived

should

Post by Archived Reply » Mon Jan 07, 2002 12:17 am

Dave: Maybe we oughta start a new thread on "taper"
Reply from dale hileman (Apple Valley, CA - U.S.A.)
Post actions:
Signature: Reply imported and archived

should

Post by Archived Reply » Mon Jan 07, 2002 12:32 am

Dale,
For the sake of the sanity of all of us, learn to read a dictionary. This from m-w.com.
"gradual diminution of thickness, diameter, or width in an elongated object"
Something tapers towards the thin end, not the thick end. Period.
Unless you're Humpty Dumpty.
Reply from Phil White (Munich - Germany)
Post actions:
Signature: Reply imported and archived

should

Post by Archived Reply » Mon Jan 07, 2002 12:46 am

But is it not possible that Dale himself may be tapering towards the thick end?
Reply from Erik Kowal ( - England)
Post actions:
Signature: Reply imported and archived

should

Post by Archived Reply » Mon Jan 07, 2002 1:01 am

Erik, Me thinks thou art are being overly kind!

Ken – November 13, 2004

Reply from Ken Greenwald (Fort Collins, CO - U.S.A.)
Post actions:
Signature: Reply imported and archived

should

Post by Archived Reply » Mon Jan 07, 2002 1:15 am

Guys, never mind, it's not important. Ken was evidently describing the Crossfire, which does indeed taper a little toward the rear; while the illustration in question was of the Crossfire Roadster, which you may see from the title illustration of the site below, clearly tapers toward the front
Chrysler Crossfire Roadster... "The styling, technology and performance get the adrenaline flowing. This spring, the car to be seen in is the Chrysler Crossfire Roadster.". ...
http://www.chrysler.com/autoshow/news/ 2004_01_05_chrysler_crossfire_roadster_87556.html?context=2004_03_31_pacif... - 23k - Cached - Similar pages

Reply from dale hileman (Apple Valley, CA - U.S.A.)
Post actions:
Signature: Reply imported and archived

should

Post by Archived Reply » Mon Jan 07, 2002 1:29 am

Erik, Q.E.D.

Ken – November 13, 2004

Reply from Ken Greenwald (Fort Collins, CO - U.S.A.)
Post actions:
Signature: Reply imported and archived

should

Post by Archived Reply » Mon Jan 07, 2002 1:44 am

Careful, Dale, or you will end up being cursed by bell, book and candle (or should that be 'taper'?).
Reply from Erik Kowal ( - England)
Post actions:
Signature: Reply imported and archived

should

Post by Archived Reply » Mon Jan 07, 2002 1:58 am

Erik, you've got that one taped. But maybe we should taper up for now
Reply from dale hileman (Apple Valley, CA - U.S.A.)
Post actions:
Signature: Reply imported and archived

should

Post by Archived Reply » Mon Jan 07, 2002 2:13 am

Just when I was trying to think up a wicked response.
Reply from Edwin Ashworth (Oldham - England)
Post actions:
Signature: Reply imported and archived

Post Reply