Page 5 of 5

Re: Brittany Ferries Now Require Helmet, High Vis and Lights

Posted: 21 Jun 2019, 10:21am
by simonhill
Phew, all finished now?

Thanks for all the replies, although some were more heat than light.

I posted this to warn other people of the email that accompanied the tickets which I received after I booked and only some 7 hours before check in. Personally, I take the word ensure as the key word in the phrase "Please ensure", with please being a polite pleasantry. Similar travelling phrases I have come across are please ensure your seat belt is securely fastened and please ensure you have placed all your liquids in a polythene bag, both of which are mandatory.

Many thanks to Bretonbikes for getting clarification and putting any future travellers at ease.

I was amused but downhearted at some of the smug replies, presumably from existing 'users' that everyone should carry or buy all the required safety equipment despite none of it being required to ride legally in either country. A certain lack of solidarity against organisations making unilateral rulings effecting cyclists I thought.

Anyway, all's well that ends well.

Out of interest I checked out and in bound travel:

easyjet from Southend to Bordeaux. 4 hours from my door to pedalling across Bordeaux. Total cost, bike, bags & pax £88.

Ferry Ouistreham to Portsmouth, train Waterloo, ride to Fenchurch Street, train to (near) Southend. 15 hours. Total cost £108

Lucky I didn't have to buy a helmet.

Re: Brittany Ferries Now Require Helmet, High Vis and Lights

Posted: 21 Jun 2019, 11:57am
by nsew
I recall a time I used BF. Embarked at Portsmouth, bedded down pronto and disembarked the following morning at Portsmouth. It took a while for that to sink in as I was the last off and still in the waking up phase. I went up to the desk and politely asked what the puck was going on? After being informed of the situation I was upgraded to a cabin on the next sailing. Fair enough I thought, I’ve got seven months to kill and had never had the luxury of a cabin before (unless you include the time i was forcibly locked in one on the Piraeus-Haifa ferry). I locked the bike up against a window inside the building and bedded down close by. It wasn’t too long before the Eastern European Security detail was on my case. After diligently hearing him out I informed him that I will not be accompanying him to the toilettes and performing such an act. The look on his face was worth the ferry fare. He took himself off to the BF desk and presumably explained to the three bored out of their minds staff what had just transpired and they all cracked up laughing.

Re: Brittany Ferries Now Require Helmet, High Vis and Lights

Posted: 21 Jun 2019, 3:36pm
by Tangled Metal
syklist wrote:
Tangled Metal wrote:Interesting the idea of language ambiguity. I had a conversation with a Latvian PhD student once who's grasp of the English language was probably better than most natives!

Anyway his example of "could you pass the salt cellar, please" Actually means "are you able to pass the salt cellar?" if English is a serving language for many. His answer to that question an Englishman asked him was simply "yes! He is able to do that!"

We play that game at home at meal times.

"Can you pass me the salt"
"Yes!"
"Hmmmm. Can you pass me the salt now?"
"Yes!"
"Are you going to do it now?"
"Mmmmm, OK, there you go."

Whilst waiting at Plymouth ferry Port building for something I was earwigging a conversation from a bunch of well turned out people of mostly retirement age or very close to it. The were having a rather academic sounding discussion about how the English language is a bit ambiguous about giving instructions compared to continental languages. Although it was very similar in sentiment to the salt cellar tale it was more educated. Quotations from Greek / roman classics through to me modern literature were referenced to make the point.

As I said to my academic partner I bet they were lecturers on the classics or literature or English languages. She agreed.

Of course recognising this trait in our language really needs some knowledge in other languages to know enough to make the comparison. I only thought about it because a foreign student with fluency in at least 4 languages pointed out out to me. I'm no academic or linguist.

Re: Brittany Ferries Now Require Helmet, High Vis and Lights

Posted: 21 Jun 2019, 3:51pm
by Tangled Metal
simonhill wrote:I was amused but downhearted at some of the smug replies, presumably from existing 'users' that everyone should carry or buy all the required safety equipment despite none of it being required to ride legally in either country. A certain lack of solidarity against organisations making unilateral rulings effecting cyclists I thought.

Anyway, all's well that ends well.

Why should people have solidarity with someone about something that they don't see as a problem? How would you describe someone who insists you support them even if you don't agree with them? You have accused us of making smug comments in replies, how should we call you? Personally I try to not insult people with different views to me (not always very good at that though which I end up n regretting).

It seems people with strong views on topics, on either side, prefer not to hear other views. Helmet use topics especially. I really should not have got involved in what is clearly about helmets (should have had a lot of posts moved to the helmet ghetto I reckon).

Re: Brittany Ferries Now Require Helmet, High Vis and Lights

Posted: 22 Jun 2019, 12:51pm
by Bez
“Can we stop arguing about helmets?”

:wink:

Re: Brittany Ferries Now Require Helmet, High Vis and Lights

Posted: 22 Jun 2019, 1:52pm
by syklist
Bez wrote:“Can we stop arguing about helmets?”

:wink:

Yes.

But you could be asking the wrong question. Try:

Are we going to stop arguing about helmets?

Followed by:

If yes, then when?

Re: Brittany Ferries Now Require Helmet, High Vis and Lights

Posted: 22 Jun 2019, 1:58pm
by brynpoeth
syklist wrote:
Bez wrote:“Can we stop arguing about helmets?”

:wink:

Yes.

But you could be asking the wrong question. Try:

Are we going to stop arguing about helmets?

Followed by:

If yes, then when?

Please may we continue arguing about language?

Re: Brittany Ferries Now Require Helmet, High Vis and Lights

Posted: 23 Jun 2019, 8:22am
by Bez
Only if there’s acknowledgment that both context and idiom are of fundamental importantance to meaning and therefore it’s naive and wrong to take one narrow definition of a word and apply it indiscriminately.

:)

Re: Brittany Ferries Now Require Helmet, High Vis and Lights

Posted: 23 Jun 2019, 8:58am
by brynpoeth
Bez wrote:Only if there’s acknowledgment that both context and idiom are of fundamental importantance to meaning and therefore it’s naive and wrong to take one narrow definition of a word and apply it indiscriminately.

:)

Mais oui
Aber sicher! :wink:

Re: Brittany Ferries Now Require Helmet, High Vis and Lights

Posted: 23 Jun 2019, 10:02am
by syklist
Bez wrote:Only if there’s acknowledgment that both context and idiom are of fundamental importantance to meaning and therefore it’s naive and wrong to take one narrow definition of a word and apply it indiscriminately.

:)

Shouldn't that read "Only if there’s acknowledgment that context, idiom and the number of units of alcohol consumed are of fundamental importantance to meaning and therefore it’s naive and wrong to take one narrow definition of a word and apply it indiscriminately."

I realised that I had left the "both" in the sentence before I finished posting. The nearest word to "both" in Norwegian is "både" but unlike both it can be used for more than two, thus "både staten, fylker og kommuner må bli involvert" ("both" the state, county and local councils must be involved). So I was about to use "both" in the same way as "både".

No units of alcohol were harmed during the process of writing this post.