[Sca-cooks] Eastern European History Cooking with Bonzer. . .

[Varju at aol.com]

--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
In a message dated 2/12/2002 7:38:26 AM Mountain Standard Time, troy at asan.com
writes:


> Yes, but why are we suddenly discounting the fact that he _tells us
> specifically_ he was born a Hungarian and that his ancestry is
> Wallachian? Apart from a very basic "if he is to be believed"
> caveat/qualification, why is this somehow less important than the
> etymology of his name? Why would he lie? Is he nouveau riche trying
> to hide a shameful past? Especially when names, especially given
> names, often don't follow any rules to speak of. For example, my
> mundane name neither indicates Macedonian ancestry nor any particular
> love of horses. And as for the late River Phoenix, what are linguists
> of the future going to gather from _that_?

I wasn't discounting what he says about his own ancestry or implying that he
is lying or anything of that sort. It is more of curiousity to me since the
family names in Hungary and Romania tend to be relatively stable and
distinctive.  German names aslo have this tendancy for that matter.  It makes
me wonder what sort of tranmutations the last name has gone through from
Romanian to Hungarian and then possibly to German.  In the end it has created
a name that doesn't give much indication of anything.  My own mundane maiden
name, as far as we can tell is a Germanized Scottish last name, so it is
something that I find interesting.


>
> Huh, Interesting! My brother does compensation law and has a roomful
> of books describing , in a very detached sort of way, legal
> precedents and case studies based on, for example, practical jokes
> performed by workers at sausage plants in New York State. Seems they
> had this cool air compressor for inflating and checking the integrity
> of sausage casings, and since sausage casings are intestines, they
> decided to "pants" some guy and... .

Hmmm. . .I haven't gotten a claim quite that interesting yet, and I think it
is a good thing.

>
> Well, you probably get the idea... my point is only that in an odd
> way, compensation statutes can occasionally be entertaining in a
> "Ripley's 'Believe It Or Not'" sort of way. "Jeez, how stupid can
> somebody be???" But then statutes and case studies are different.
>

In the past five months since I started a as a claims analyst I've run into a
number of cases that make me shake my head.  I can't image what one would run
into with a larger population than Wyoming.

Noemi