The Modern Antiquarian. Stone Circles, Ancient Sites, Neolithic Monuments, Ancient Monuments, Prehistoric Sites, Megalithic MysteriesThe Modern Antiquarian
Home Latest Posts Forums Maps Help
Browse Sites News Blog Contributors The Books
Head To Head   The Modern Antiquarian   General Discussion Forum Start a topic | Search
The Modern Antiquarian
Re: Ancient sites: Protect or Use?
225 messages
Select a forum:
Littlestone wrote:

Yawn... and all that is very subjective.

No need to be rude. I'm discussing this politely... not attacking your opinion.

Littlestone wrote:
Just answer one little question - what in your book is litter?

lit·ter /ˈlɪtər/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[lit-er] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1. objects strewn or scattered about; scattered rubbish.

Now we'll have to discuss how we define rubbish. ;)

Hell, I'll pre-empt that....

rub·bish /ˈrʌbɪʃ/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ruhb-ish] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1. worthless, unwanted material that is rejected or thrown out

Now seeing as offerings clearly have worth to someone, they can't be absolutely defined as rubbish. Ergo, they're not litter. ;)


Reply | with quote		Posted by Mustard
26th June 2007ce
20:47

In reply to:

Re: Ancient sites: Protect or Use? (Littlestone)

1 reply:

Re: Ancient sites: Protect or Use? (Littlestone)

Messages in this topic:

Terms & Conditions  |  Home  |  Julian Cope presents Head Heritage Top of page