New word needed to differentiate cyclists

OP
Dogtrousers

Dogtrousers

Kilometre nibbler
The problem I see with inventing a new word to subdivide cyclists is that the proponent is the "Active Travel Commissioner for the Sheffield region".

Her concern seems to be that the word "cyclist" has negative associations, and people will be reluctant to ride their bikes because they don't want to be - or don't see themselves as - "cyclists". So if we invent a new word, say, "pootler" people will dash down to Halfords safe in the knowledge that they are not about to become "cyclists". They can safely ride their bicycles, while they can continue to hate cyclists and run them off the road when driving.

The problem I see with this is that it is divisive. The "pootlers" become the good guys, deserving of infrastructure and encouragement, and the "cyclists" are the bad guys, deserving of no respect at all.
 
Ok, try this test: look in the Concise Oxford:

View attachment 462682

That's quite some listing for a non-word, wouldn't you say?

I used the word in its correct sense - to draw a distinction between the ongoing discussion over terminology (which, by implication, is not substantive - which is to say, it's vague, ethereal, lacking in any real substance) and the proposal that 'them & us' thinking is more dangerous to cyclists than anything a helmet can prevent - a proposal which, I'm suggesting, has a firm basis in reality, making it important, meaningful. Would anything be lost be its removal? Yes. That distinction. Which is why I included it.
Do you honestly think that makes any sense?

'Ongoing' is another one - it adds nothing to the meaning of the sentence.

Strip away all the wordy drivel and there's nothing left.

Dare I say it, very little substance.
 

ericmark

Regular
Location
North Wales
Once you have waited at a set of traffic lights for 5 minutes only to realise they do not detect a cyclist you must be forgiven for thinking they do not apply to you!

In some cases there are cycle tracks and buttons on traffic lights for you to request a green light, even seen them high up for horse riders, however the cycle track installers seem to have no idea about road safety, next to Flintshire County Council highways depot the cycle track takes you past the traffic light before it crosses the road, has no cross button, and from that position impossible to tell which roads have right of way, this is outside the highways depot, so what chance anywhere else?

Unless there is a national standard so you know a cycle track will not have areas where you need to dismount, I have to lay bike of floor to dismount no longer can I stand on pedal and swing my leg over. And wife with electric assisted it would shoot off leaving her in mid air if she tried it. Simple if it requires you to dismount it's not a cycle track.

I remember well in York seeing what it was like when the Chocolate factory shift ended, never seen so many bikes on a road, motor traffic simply had to give way, the whole city seemed to be designed for bikes, at least back in the 1970's cars were allowed on the roads if they were careful and gave bikes priority, ratio of 3 cars to 100 bikes. But today that's all gone, worst time to be on road is school opening and closing times, when I went to school I don't remember any one being dropped off or picked up at the school, very rare to see parents at school, playing truant was easy, write a letter from your mum, and make sure you never let a real letter from mum reach school. Everyone with shining morning face walked like a snail to school. And had been doing it without a problem since Shakespeare's time.

Yes there are two groups of cyclist, those where it is transport, and those where it is a sport, however there are so many sub groups, those using it as exercise, those with a time constraint and those without, and when I go to pick up chips, as quicker by bike as cycle track reduces distance, I am in no hurry, but on return don't want chips to get cold. Other than that only ensuring home before dark needs any time consideration. But still annoying to stop at traffic lights only to find they don't detect bikes.
 

swee'pea99

Legendary Member
Do you honestly think that makes any sense?

'Ongoing' is another one - it adds nothing to the meaning of the sentence.

Strip away all the wordy drivel and there's nothing left.

Dare I say it, very little substance.
Putting to one side the question as how one might believe something makes sense dishonestly, yes. Absolutely. It makes perfect sense. Let's see if I can make the whole thing any clearer for you.

You asserted that the word 'substantive' is a non-word.
I showed how the Oxford & Cambridge dictionaries disagreed.
You ignored that, and reiterated your view that the word added nothing to the sentence in which it was used, and that its removal would make no difference.
I explained what the word was adding to the sentence, and what would be lost by its removal.
You asked me whether I thought that made any sense. Honestly.
I've now answered: yes.

I hope that's clear. If you have any further difficulties understanding, do get back to me and I'll try to help. Though I have to say, it is proving to be uphill work...
 
OP
Dogtrousers

Dogtrousers

Kilometre nibbler
Yes there are two groups of cyclist, those where it is transport, and those where it is a sport, however there are so many sub groups, those using it as exercise, those with a time constraint and those without...
But you can arbitrarily divide people who ride bikes however you like. Transport vs sport; disc brakes vs rim brakes (oh, and hubs too); Male and female; and so on and so on ...

Why take that particular sub-categorisation and choose to reinforce it by attempting to change language? The only result will be that "cyclists" (boo hiss, lycra louts) become more of an out group than before. Far better (and more difficult) is to to actually challenge the "Lycra-clad yob, stereotype" (to quote Ms Storey).
 

rugby bloke

Veteran
Location
Northamptonshire
B Far better (and more difficult) is to to actually challenge the "Lycra-clad yob, stereotype" (to quote Ms Storey).
A simple example - I was cycling through a village last night and a father was out supervising his 2 young daughters as they road up and down the street on their bikes. The youngest could only have been around 4, on a tiny bike with stabilizers. As we passed we both smiled, waved and said hello to each other, both she and her Dad looked so happy. A simple interaction but it helped to demonstrate that a fully lycred up cyclist is also human.
 
Putting to one side the question as how one might believe something makes sense dishonestly, yes. Absolutely. It makes perfect sense. Let's see if I can make the whole thing any clearer for you.

You asserted that the word 'substantive' is a non-word.
I showed how the Oxford & Cambridge dictionaries disagreed.
You ignored that, and reiterated your view that the word added nothing to the sentence in which it was used, and that its removal would make no difference.
I explained what the word was adding to the sentence, and what would be lost by its removal.
You asked me whether I thought that made any sense. Honestly.
I've now answered: yes.

I hope that's clear. If you have any further difficulties understanding, do get back to me and I'll try to help. Though I have to say, it is proving to be uphill work...
Instead of patronising, try to grasp the 'fog factor'

http://www.readabilityformulas.com/gunning-fog-readability-formula.php
 

rivers

How far can I go?
Location
Bristol
The hooligan element in cycling is far larger in percentage terms than the hooligan element in football. Just observe any road junction in London and count the number of aggressive morons on bikes recklessly cutting in and out of the traffic and completely ignoring the red traffic lights. I was stopped at Holland Park roundabout the other day at a red light and four out of the five cyclists that passed me went straight through the red light. Lycra louts is a very accurate description for these idiots, because all four of the RLJ'ers were wearing lycra gear and riding road bikes, whereas the only cyclist who obeyed the law was dressed normally and riding a flat bar hybrid.
Yet the "lycra louts" are the law abiding cyclists around here. It's the one's on "normal" bikes wearing "normal" clothes that ride on the pavements, jump red lights, and are an all around menace
 
OP
Dogtrousers

Dogtrousers

Kilometre nibbler
Yet the "lycra louts" are the law abiding cyclists around here. It's the one's on "normal" bikes wearing "normal" clothes that ride on the pavements, jump red lights, and are an all around menace
Bloody normal louts.

We need to coin a new word for them.
 
Top Bottom