🚀 go-pugleaf

borton@ux5.cso.uiuc.edu (borton scott andrew) wrote:
>Marc Bonnaud (mbonnaud@francenet.fr) wrote:
>: colin@colina.demon.co.uk (Colin Paul Adams) wrote:
>: >>>>>> "Kurt" == Kurt Swanson <kurt@dna.lth.se> writes:
>: >
>: >    >> - where I, as a french speaker, make the difference between a
>: >    >> "fleuve " and a "rivi�re", the english-speaking person will
>: >    >> only see a "river"
>: >
>: >    Kurt> English has many words for moving bodies of water: stream,
>: >    Kurt> brook, creek, rivulet, ...
>
>: Of course we too have "torrent", "ruisseau", etc...
>: but you failed ( by ignorance ) to get my point there
>: there is a significant difference between rivi�re and fleuve, since
>: the latter pours into the sea while the former pours into a rivi�re
>: or a fleuve. A difference which does not exist in english. 
>
>You're forgetting about "tributary," which pours into a larger river. The
>difference does indeed exist in English.
>
>--scott
>

No, this is "affluent" in French ; English has definitely no word to
designate only rivers that pour into the sea.

-- 
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Marc Bonnaud
page TAM-TAM : http://PersoWeb.francenet.fr/~mbonnaud
courrier : mbonnaud@francenet.fr
TAM : Toile d'Araign�e Mondiale
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++